Category: Authors

  • Israel to begin new UAV deliveries to Turkey

    Israel to begin new UAV deliveries to Turkey

    TURKISH DEFENSE MINISTER VECDI GONUL VISITS ISRAEL

    Saban Kardas

    Turkey’s Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul visited Israel on October 29 and 30 to expedite the Turkish Armed Forces’ (TAF) purchase of 10 Heron Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) from Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI). He was accompanied by a large delegation that included Undersecretary for Defense Industries Murad Bayar and several military officers and civilians. The meeting also provided opportunities to discuss regional diplomacy and bilateral relations between Turkey and Israel.

    In 2005 Turkey awarded a $180 million contract for the off-the-shelf purchase of 10 UAVs to IAI and Elbit Systems, which outbid offers for the U.S. Predator UAV (Zaman, October 25). In response to the acceleration of the PKK’s terror campaign, the TAF’s new counter-terrorism strategy has been centered on the effective use of intelligence (Terrorism Focus, August 12). In addition to real-time images provided by U.S. satellites, the reconnaissance missions conducted by UAVs have come to play a crucial role in the air strikes against PKK strongholds in Northern Iraq and PKK militants inside Turkey.

    Despite the urgency of the TAF’s order, however, the Israeli contractor has postponed the delivery of 10 Herons to Turkey several times over the past year, citing technical failures in the camera system that will be produced by a Turkish subcontractor. In addition to accelerating domestic programs to develop national UAVs and the purchase of three Israeli Aerostar Tactical UAVs, Turkey leased Herons from Israel in 2007 (Yeni Safak, December 28, 2007). When one Heron at the TAF’s disposal crashed in July due to engine problems, Israel could not replace it because it did not have one available in its inventory (Referans, October 21). Turkey instead bought a smaller UAV called the Searcher.

    The shorter range of the Aerostars has hindered the flow of intelligence for the TAF. Surveillance shortages are speculated to have played a part in the TAF’s failure to prevent the PKK attack on Aktutun outpost, which claimed the lives of 17 soldiers on October 3 (Milliyet, October 18). Domestic debate on this attack has refocused attention on the difficulties Turkey has experienced with surveillance aircraft. On the eve of the trip, Gonul was urged to put pressure on Israel to speed up the delivery of the UAVs (ANKA, October 21).

    Gonul visited Israel at the invitation of Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak to observe the test flights of the Heron UAVs. Following the demonstrations, Gonul found the drones’ performance excellent and remarked that they would fill the requirements successfully and strengthen Turkey’s military capabilities. Reiterating the urgency of the UAVs for Turkey, Gonul noted that two of the Herons would be delivered to the TAF by the end of November and the remaining eight in early 2009 (Yeni Safak, October 31). At a meeting with Barak and Israeli Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, Gonul stated that cooperation with Israel in defense projects would not be limited to UAVs, although he declined to name any other specific projects (Milliyet, October 31).

    For its part, the Israeli side also is keen on deepening its partnership in defense projects with Turkey. When Barak visited Ankara in February as Gonul’s guest, he called for greater cooperation between the two countries and emphasized that Israel did not harbor any concerns about transferring sensitive technology to Turkey (Voice of America, February 12). Barak was particularly eager to convince Turkey to purchase Israel’s Ofeq spy satellites (Jerusalem Post, February 11). Israel’s flexible attitude has definitely been welcome to Ankara, because most of Turkey’s ambitious defense procurement and modernization programs contain stringent rules requiring greater domestic contribution in production or technology transfers to Turkish companies. Given the problems that U.S. weapons producers face in obtaining Turkish defense contracts due to the Turkish procurement policy, Israel provides an alternative for the Turkish military to obtain high-tech weapons systems for its fight against the PKK and to upgrade its aging weapons systems with larger domestic input. It has been reported, however, that the TAF is close to acquiring U.S.-made Predators to meet its urgent needs but is constrained by the Turkish procurement rules (Today’s Zaman, October 29).

    Vecdi Gonul also met Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipora “Tzipi” Livni, both of whom emphasized Turkey’s strategic importance in the Middle East and the value they attached to maintaining bilateral relations. They commended Turkey’s constructive efforts to contribute to stability and peace in the Middle East, in particular its role in the recent Syrian-Israeli negotiations. Livni, however, used this opportunity to express Israel’s displeasure with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to Turkey in August, and she called on Turkey to support international efforts to increase pressure on Iran. Israel and the United States have been critical of Turkey’s warm relations with Iran at a time when they are seeking to isolate Tehran on the nuclear issue (see EDM August 14). Gonul avoided confronting his Israeli hosts but clarified Turkey’s position by maintaining that Turkey would continue to develop relations with all countries in this volatile region on the principles of nonintervention in domestic affairs and good-neighborliness (CNNTurk, October 30; Milliyet, October 31). At a meeting with Israeli President Shimon Peres, Gonul discussed possibilities for building industrial zones on the West Bank (Zaman, October 31).

    Political differences aside, the two countries share a common ground: Turkey needs cooperation with Israel to fill its deficiencies in combating the PKK, while Israel views Turkey as a lucrative market for its sophisticated weapons systems. The recent visit reaffirmed both parties’ determination and ability to put an occasional divergence on regional diplomatic issues aside and maintain cooperation in mutually beneficial projects.

  • HOW TO VOTE IN NATIONAL ELECTIONS?

    HOW TO VOTE IN NATIONAL ELECTIONS?

    This article discusses how one decides for whom to vote. Every voter oat to have some basic principles on how the government should be run. I believe that a government should be run rationally, secularly, problems should be solved privately, using a minimum of government, but defensive organs of the government (Military, Police, strict control of what we eat and import) should be strong.One must vote only for one representative (or Senator, or President) or for his opponent in this country. If our representative does not share all our principles, and his opponent shares some, we have to decide which one shares the most important principles. This is voting for issues. Some people vote straight for one party without regard to issues. Maybe their fathers voted for that party, or maybe everyone in that district votes that way. A good citizen must study the issues debated in the election and should have his opinion. He should also be knowledgeable on the people running for office.

    I want to tell here my voting record. I grew up in Turkey and could first vote there at the age of 32, because I had first to go to Germany for six years of Engineering studies, and two more years to the obligatory military service. Elections were every 5 years (I think). I was working for the Turkish Iron & Steel Co. at Karabuk. Turkey had just become a multi-party country. The incumbent People’s Republican Party, had been started by Ataturk and most engineers belonged to it. I was not active in any party. The new “Democrat Party” promised a slightly different future. My wife knew personally the head of that party and was convinced to vote Democrat But a bunch of irresponsible candidate representative Democrats had came to Karabuk and promised to the workers, that if they will bring them ten signatures of complaining workers, they will get their supervisor fired. They soon had fired two of the best supervisors, who were not immediately replaceable I had to go to Ankara, to explain the real situation to some higher Democrat Party people and tell them how they were destroying the steel industry. The two supervisors were rehired but the moral in the company hit bottom. Although The Democrat Party was promising a brighter future, in view of their actions, I voted for the Incumbent People’s Republican Party. That was my first and last vote in Turkey. At that election in 1950 the Democrats won a landslide of a victory, but they thought they could do anything with such a majority and in 1960 the Democrat party was closed. The Peoples’ Republican Party was eventually hijacked by socialists, so there is no more party in Turkey that represents Ataturk’s legacy.

    When I arrived in the U.S. and got naturalized, I registered as Republican, because I liked their platform of small government and private solution of public problems. From January 1960 on, I voted continuously as Republican. George W. Bush changed everything. Bethlehem Steel Corporation, where I had worked as a research engineer for almost a quarter of a century, was going bankrupt from poor management, but could not find a buyer, because of its obligations towards its retirees. President Bush, in stead of protecting the earned and promised pensions, life insurance, and health insurance of these retirees, allowed the Bethlehem Steel management to break their promise to the retirees, so that the corporation could be sold. Thanks to the ERISSA law passed by the Democrats a few years ago, my pension was taken over by the government, but I lost $26,000 of life insurance, and now It cost me $430.26 a month to replace the Bethlehem Steel health insurance that was robbed from me.

    AARP wanted to import prescription drugs cheaper from Canada for its retired members. President Bush, in stead of helping AARP, vetoed it, It put the interest of drug companies ahead of that of the citizens who elected him.

    President Bush allowed the evangelical religious groups to hijack his party. He gave funds to religious groups in spite of the separation of Church and State in our constitution. Even Tom Brokaw remarked that the U.S. was going towards a theocracy.

    After 9/11 and the brief Afghanistan war, in stead of following those actions by stronger American forces, fully destroying the Taliban, and catching Osame bin Laden, the Iraq War was started under the influence of petroleum interests. Iraq was a secular country and had no relation with the Taliban or the Al Qaeda. The reasons advanced for this war were proven false.. It cost us almost $1 trillion, 4200 dead, 25000 wounded and 15 % of non-wounded soldiers having mental problems. In the coming election, ending the Iraq war soon and staying there until victory has become an important issue.

    President Bush broke United States promises and signatures in the Geneva Convention, and in the Treaty of Westphalia which was the standard since the 17th Century. He put the United States in the position of an international Pariah. He gave Russia an alibi to attack his old USSR members.

    The list is much longer, but this much is enough to characterize him and the party he changed. Of course George W. Bush is not running for re-election, but the one who is running from the Republican Party, John McCain, is almost a carbon-copy of President Bush. He boasts having voted 90 % with President Bush. He is clearly preferring corporations’ interest over citizen’s interest. Finally his choice of Vice President is too weak. Using an old Turkish expression, Governor Sarah Palin “need to eat 40 bakeries’ full of bread before she qualifies” as President of the United States.

    I did not tell you how I am going to vote on November 4, 2008, did I ?

    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    To Readers’ Attention: Any one who wishes to receive THE ORHAN TARHAN LETTER should sent an e-mail to orhant@verizon.net with his/her full name, e-mail address , and PLEASE phone number, in case there is an interruption caused by the server, or in case of e-mail address change. It is free. Comments are welcome. These LETTERs are also published in AmericanChronicle.com

  • PLEASE, TEACH THE CHILDREN WELL!

    PLEASE, TEACH THE CHILDREN WELL!

    To: mcollins@embassymag.ca

    Dear Michelle Collins,

    Please allow me to formulate my op-ed under the following headings in order to provide you with a thoughtful rebuttal to your article ” Turkey Decries Toronto School Board Genocide Course” (Embassy, cANADA, August 27th, 2008.)

    GREEK-ARMENIAN COLLUSION AGAINST TURKEY:

    The accounts of Turkish-Armenian history provided by a Greek-Canadian (Liberal MP, Jim Karygiannis) and an Armenian-Canadian (ANC Exec. Dir., Aris Babikian) in your article are so typically distorted, that they can hardly be considered as much more than “settling of an old score” via “political lynching”. It is quite in keeping with the Greek-Armenian collusion during the ill-fated invasion and destruction of Izmir by Greek army (1919) which, in turn, ignited the Turkish Independence War (1919-1922.) This anti-Turkish Greek-Armenian complicity was re-established in 1974 after the failed attempt by the Greek-Cypriots to ethnically cleanse Cyprus of its Turkish-Cypriot population which triggered a military intervention by one of the three guarantors, Turkey. What we see in Toronto today is just another link in that anti-Turkish Greek-Armenian-collusion chain.

    GENOCIDE CHARGES UNFOUNDED:

    Babikian’s version of history is so “Diaspora” that one can easily write a 500-page book on it, effortlessly. I don’t have time to write it, so I’ll try to make my response as manageable as possible. While some amongst us may be forgiven for taking the ceaseless Armenian propaganda at face value, merely because they are repeated so often, it is difficult and painful for us, Turks, most of whom are themselves the descendants of Turkish survivors of the yet mostly untold, readily dismissed out of bias, or ignored massacres of Turks during the Balkan Wars of 1912-13, the World War I of 1914-18, and the Turkish Independence War of 1919-1922. Collectively termed, “seferberlik” (meaning “the mobilization” in Turkish,) those endless war years of 1912-1922 rained death and destruction on Turkish people. The Ottoman Empire was under vicious attacks from all corners and Armenians shamelessly sided with the invading enemy armies when not violently revolting. Those countless, nameless, faceless Turkish victims, doing nothing more than defending their home like any citizen anywhere in the world would do, are killed again today with those politically motivated and baseless charges of Armenian genocide.

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

    Allegations of Armenian genocide are racist and dishonest history. They are racist because they imply that Turkish or Muslim dead are not important, only Armenian or Christian dead are. This racist approach ignores the immense Turkish suffering: about 3 million dead during the WWI; around half a million of them at the hands of Armenian nationalists. By ignoring the suffering of one side completely, any war, including the American civil war, may be made to look like a genocide. And the allegations of Armenian genocide are dishonest because they deliberately dismiss “The Six T’s” of the Turkish-Armenian conflict:

    1) Tumult (as in many violent Armenian armed uprisings between 1882 and 1920)

    2) Terrorism (by Armenian nationalists and militias from 1882-1920 perpetrated on non-combatant Muslim civilians, mostly Muslim women and children, and elderly men)

    3) Treason (Armenians joining the invading enemy armies and killing their Muslim neighbors and other fellow citizens, including the Ottoman-Jews)

    4) Territorial demands (where Armenians were a minority, not a majority)

    5) Turkish suffering and losses (i.e. those caused only by the Armenian nationalists)

    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.)

    Armenians, thus, effectively put an end to their millennium of relatively peaceful and harmonious co-habitation in Anatolia with Muslims by killing their Muslim/Turkish neighbors and openly joining the invading enemy. Western diplomats and Christian missionaries were behind all of the “6 T’s” listed above.

    TURKISH VIEWS CENSORED ACROSS THE EDITORIAL BOARDS DUE TO A “CONSENSUS OF BIAS”

    Excluding responsible opposing views in covering any controversial issue is a form of censorship which violates the notion of freedom of speech. Decent people everywhere have a responsibility to ensure that the public is given a fair chance to hear all sides of a controversy such as the Turkish-Armenian conflict. “Partisan accounts” of history should not be taught children as “settled history” . We must all strive to “teach the children well.” Fairness, honesty, and truth are all that I ask.

    HERE IS THE BIG PICTURE:

    MILLENNIUM:

    Turks and Armenians—and other Muslims and Christians— enjoyed a reasonably harmonious co-habitation in Anatolia for a millennium (that’s a thousand years!) under that “crescent” that the Greek-Armenian conspiracy loves to demonize.

    THE LOYAL NATION:

    Turks liked and trusted the Armenian subjects of the Ottoman Empire so much that Turks called the Armenians “Millet-i Sadika” (the loyal nation.) Armenians enjoyed high standards of living in the Ottoman Empire mostly engaging in trade, construction, arts, and more, while Muslims did most of the heavy lifting of the empire such as agriculture, soldiery, administration. (It is interesting to note that some Armenian propagandists use this as a proof of inequity, however, when the Armenians were given the right to soldiery after 1908, the Armenians invented ways to get out of that civic duty (see the letter by Armenians sent to the Lausanne Conference in 1923 asking for the right to be free from soldiery to be bestowed upon the Armenian community.)

    PROSPERITY & STABILITY:

    The above picture, i.e. with all its shortcomings and/or defects, was still the nearest thing to perfection, given the state of humanity through the middle ages around the world, especially in Europe with wars, conquests, colonization, slavery, mass killings, mass deportations, crusaders, inquisitions, holocausts, pogroms, and more. Compared to all this mayhem in Europe in the last millennium, the Ottoman Empire with its unique “ millet system”, was so peaceful and orderly that it could be considered the USA or Canada of Europe at the time. Armenians were one of the major beneficiaries of this centuries-long stability.

    ARMENIAN REBELLIONS, TERRORISM, TREASON, TERRITORIAL DEMANDS:

    All that started changing for the Turkish-Armenian relations after 1878 Berlin Peace Conference. Russia started claiming special protector’s right over the Ottoman-Armenian community with an keen eye towards capturing Istanbul and the straits (Bosporus & Dardanelles) to extend the Russian imperial reach into warm waters of the Mediterranean. Britain and France were not exactly innocent bystanders as they were eyeing other parts of the Ottoman Empire for themselves. The U.S. Protestant missionaries, headquartered in Boston, with their many educational and medical facilities dotting Anatolia used as convenient cover for their missionary activities, focused their attention on the Armenian community once they realized that proselytization of Muslims, Jews, or Greeks were nearly impossible. The Boston missionaries started dividing and polarizing not only the communities of the Ottoman Empire but also the Ottoman-Armenian community itself. The missionary sermons were incendiary, pitting Armenians against Turks, Muslims against Christians, and even Protestants against the Gregorians and Catholic. Thus, these religious men abused the traditional hospitality of Turks by organizing a hate-filled resistance among the Armenians against the Turkish rule, causing untold miseries on all sides… These men of god, thus, caused much spilling of innocent blood in the name of god. In that sense, the Protestant missionaries may well be considered the guiltiest party of them all, followed by Tsarist Russia, Imperial Britain, Colonialist France, and Western media (The New York Times, for example, topping the list in biased coverage by publishing 145 anti-Turkish articles in 1915 alone with an incredible “ZERO” Turkish rebuttals allowed!)

    ARMENIANS REVOLUTIONARY ORGANIZATIONS LAUNCHED A BLOODY CAMPAIGN:

    The Armenians started creating revolutionary organizations: “Ermenakan” in Van, Turkey (1882), “Hunchack” in Geneva, Switzerland (1887), Dashnaksutiun in Tbilisi, Georgia (1890) and many others of many sizes and locations. Almost without exception, they were all bent on armed resistance against the Turkish rule. The Armenians used propaganda, agitation, terror, rebellions, and supreme treason, in that order, from 1882 to 1915, when finally some of the Armenians (not all) were sent on a Tereset (Temporary Resettlement). Tereset was a justified military measure because the Armenian bands would conduct violent raids on the unprotected Muslim villages, frustrate the Ottoman military supply lines, and even harass the rear of the Ottoman Army during a time of war. No country (including the U.S. and Canada) would tolerate this kind of wide open rebellion, pandemic treason, and omnipresent terror to be put into action by any community, large or small, at a time of war the least of all.

    ARMENIAN NATIONALISTS USE CIVILIANS AS “HUMAN SHIELDS” AFTER DEVASTATING ATTACKS ON MUSLIMS:

    The Armenian bands would launch their bomb and gun attacks during the night and then hide in ordinary homes during the day, turning Armenian women and children to little more than human shields for their murderous and treasonous acts. Those who cry out today “Why did the Turks force some helpless Armenian women and children to move?” should re-phrase their questions and first ask the nationalist Armenian leaders “Why did you use the non-combatant Armenian women and children as your cover before and human shields after your dastardly acts of terror against the Muslims?”

    DO DIASPORA STORIES PROVE GENOCIDE?

    What most coverage in the media describe are personal tragedies experienced by Armenians. Note that corresponding personal tragedies on the Turkish side, such as mine, are neither reported nor investigated, nor even wondered at all, in the Western media. While it is not this writer’s intention to minimize the Armenian suffering, it must be questioned as to how it can be considered as “separate” from the Muslim suffering in the same area, same era, and under same conditions, when there was a terrible world war was going on that engulfed the Christian and Muslim communities producing an irregular warfare. How is my Turkish grandparents’ suffering caused by Ottoman-Christians any less than Armenians’ suffering caused by Armenian rebellions, terrorism, treason, territorial demands, and Tereset? How is Turkish suffering any less painful than Armenian suffering? How are Turkish dead belittled and ignored while Armenian dead are exaggerated and glorified? I am sure Armenians lived through some or most of those personal horror stories s often told in the media (though definitely not all of them.) But they pale in comparison to what we, Turks, had to endure at hands of the likes of those Armenian terrorists, rebels, traitors, backstabbers, and murderers. My personal family story is much more tragic than most Armenians’, if anyone cares to know about it, please read the following essay of mine as it is too painful to write it here again:

    TURKISH LAST NAMES : HONEST STORY TELLERS

    PERSONAL TRAGEDIES BY THEMSELVES DO NOT MAKE IT A GENOCIDE:

    Not all killings, not all sufferings fall automatically under the classification “genocide”. The U.N. 1948 definition is crystal clear: there must be an intention to destroy all or part of a community. Without intention, a murder is just that, a murder, and penal code can amply deal with that. The Armenians or their sympathizers have never proven Turkish intent to annihilate Armenians. In fact, History shows that just the contrary is true:

    a) a millennium of peaceful co-habitation between Turks and Armenians;

    b) endowment of Ottoman-Armenians with a “ loyal nation” status;

    c) highest posts for Armenians in all walks of Ottoman life (the parliament, politics, diplomacy, military, trade, business, art…);

    d) all of the above followed by, unfortunately, an intense period of organized Armenian terror, rebellions, treason, and territorial demands, and more…

    e) triggering a temporary military, wartime safety measure of moving only those Armenians who posed a serious threat to Ottoman Empire’s war effort;

    f) Note that Armenians of Istanbul, Izmir, Edirne, Aleppo and other places were not moved, as they were not considered a threat;

    g) Armenians in the armed services, doctors, and most inner city people were also kept out of the Tereset (Temporary resettlement) order;

    h) detailed steps were described in countless official orders—too many to be dismissed casually—on how to move the community safely and orderly and claim the properties back on their return (contrary to common misperception, many did return!)

    There is more, much more, but I already wrote most of them at www.turkla.com. I don’t want to re-write them here. You are welcome to check it out yourself.

    ETHOCIDE:

    Frustrated by the persistently biased coverage of the Turkish-Armenian civil war during WWI and the ensuing censorship of Turkish views in American media, I have coined a new term back in 2003—my humble gift to the English language and a thoughtful and long overdue supplement to Rafael Lemkin’s definition of genocide: “ethocide”.

    A brief definition of ethocide is “extermination of ethics by systematic and malicious mass-deception in exchange for political, economical, social, religious, and other favors and benefits.”

    The civil war that had been raging up to 1915 and the Tereset it inevitably resulted in was no genocide, but what the Armenians and their sympathizers did in misrepresenting it ever since is clearly ethocide.

    I urge . therefore, an end to the ethocidal coverage of the Turkish-Armenian conflict in the Western media and academia.

    LAST WORD:

    It was a wartime tragedy, engineered, provoked, and waged by Armenians, with support from Russia, England, France, the U.S., and Western media; but not genocide.

    Please, teach the children well!

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

  • MEET TURKISH-AMERICANS

    MEET TURKISH-AMERICANS

    President Clinton received a standing ovation from the Turkish Parliament after his address there to the Turkish nation on November 15, 1999, where he praised Turkey for more than half a century of friendship with the United States.

    More than half a century?

    I knew that. Remember the Korean War and the fearless Turkish Brigade there? In fact, did not President Harry Truman sign Distinguished Unit Citation on July 11, 1951 for the Turkish Brigade’s acts of heroism which read: “The Turkish Brigade, a member of the United Nations Forces in Korea is cited for exceptionally outstanding performance of duty in combat in the area of Kumyangjang-ni, Korea, from 25 to 27 January 1951.” ?

    “…whatever the relationship between (Turkey and the United States) is at any one time, the most important thing about the relationship is the relationship between the two peoples…” were the starting remarks by the U.S. Ambassador Edelman at the opening ceremony of “100 Years Of Turkish-American Friendship” photo exhibition at The National Library, Ankara, Turkey, on April 04, 2005.

    100 years?

    And yet, how many in America today could point to the location of Turkey on a world map?

    “… Thirty-two years ago when President Eisenhower visited Turkey, he was greeted by a roaring crowd and thousands hailed him in the streets, cheering not merely America but also our shared values and ideals. One sign in particular touched him. It read: ‘Welcome to your second home.’ And today I already feel as President Eisenhower did, that Turkey is a second home. And I say that not merely because of your famed hospitality but because of these common ideals and interests. Turkish-American friendship reaches back as far as the late 18th century…” articulated the 41st President, George H. W. Bush, at the arrival ceremony in Ankara, Turkey, on July 20th, 1991.

    The late 18th century?

    Who knew?

    Of course, Turkey was called the Ottoman Empire in those days. Whatever the polity, Turks and Americans did forge remarkably close ties through trade and commerce, military cooperation, immigration, education, science, medicine, music, and more.

    Both the U.S. and Turkey were blessed with great leaders, Washington and Ataturk, who fought against impossible odds, long, protracted wars of liberation.

    Both military victories were followed by sweeping reforms based on a shared vision of nation building, democracy, rule of law, liberty, modernization, free enterprise, and pursuit of happiness.

    Both founders succeeded in their tasks and both leaders are still revered very much today.

    Both countries are engaged in the same global war against terrorism and are close strategic partners.

    The US boasts the leading economy in the world today while Turkey is, remarkably, the 16th largest economy and growing at a dizzying pace.

    Of course the U.S. is the sole super power today and Turkey is increasingly a global player with its power base located in the epi-center of that tri-continental segment of the world map encompassing the Balkans, the Caucasus, and the Middle East where the “Neo-Silk-Route” to Turkic Central Asia and China as well as all important energy transportation lines (oil and gas) supplying Europe from Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Iran, and Iraq crisscross.

    “… America is honored to call Turkey an ally and a friend… Many Americans trace their heritage to Turkey, and Turks have contributed greatly to our national life — including, most recently, a lot of baskets for the Detroit Pistons from Mehmet Okur. I know you’re proud that this son of your country helped to win an NBA championship, and America is proud of him as well…” pronounced the son Bush, our 43rd president, during his speech in Istanbul, Turkey, on June 29, 2004.

    I am one of those Americans who traces his heritage directly to Turkey. There are close to 50,000 of us in Southern California and about half a million, coast to coast.

    If you are an NBA fan, for example, then you already know Mehmet Okur (Utah Jazz) and Hido Turkoglu (Orlando Magic). If music is your cup of tea, then you probably have heard of Ahmet Ertegun (deceased,) of the Atlantic Records company who gave us the Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Ray Charles, and other such music icons. If you are into medicine, you probably remember Doctor Mehmet Oz, the world renown heart surgeon, weight loss and healthy living guru.

    But if you are like the most of us, leading normal lives, working hard, raising kids, paying taxes and mortgages, then you probably don’t know much about us, Turkish Americans. We may be around you, in fact, working with you, but you may not know us, as we are mostly integrated, if you like, if not perhaps assimilated.

    We will speak English (most in the first generation with accent) and most of us will have shortened, Americanized names imposed on us by our loving American friends (Thus, Coskun becomes Josh; Selahattin turns into Sel; Ercument morphs into Eric; Can reads John; Gul translates into Rose; and so on.)

    We mostly subscribe to Muslim faith but few of us, if any, can keep up with the tenets or rituals of Islam (praying five times a day, for example) due to lack of time, facilities, or other reasons. Religion does not play a commanding role in our lives as most may innocently expect or some may prejudicially believe, but we respect all the faiths all the same. Some humorously put Soccer as being the most important driving force in our lives, not without justification. (A few fans are already planning, for example, to charter one or more jets from LAX to Johannesburg, South Africa, in June 2010, to take hundreds of Turkish-Americans from Southern California to cheer the Turkish National Soccer Team, if of course, Turkey makes it through the qualification rounds to the FIFA World Cup Finals. If not, well, turn on the ESPN and pass the beer and chips, thank you.)

    Turkish-Americans do have annual balls, spring/summer picnics, secular weekend schools for K-6 kids, and most of us travel to Turkey every other year, if not annually. We miss the people and food in Turkey (Have you ever eaten a “karniyarik”, seasoned minced meat and vegetable stuffed eggplants baked in an oven? “Fingerlicking” is an understatement to describe this most unique taste!..)

    We came here during the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s and most of us are professionals, with at least one degree, some with more. We are mostly busy raising our second generation, American-born generation of Turkish-Americans, if you like. There were immigration in late 19th and early 20th Centuries, but most of those returned home to Turkey after they retired; couldn’t bear the homesickness any longer, I guess. We are, however, here to stay. This is our home. We are going nowhere.

    By the way, it does bother us a great deal when people judge us, our culture or history, our motherland, without bothering to check their “assumptions” and “facts” with us.

    It frustrates us a great deal to be stereotype-cast in the media into roles totally alien to us.

    It even angers us when outrageous lies about our history and our heritage are circulated and/or taken at face value. We are Americans. We would not do to others what we would not like done to us.

    So, please, next time you hear a terrible story or an outrageous claim defaming our history or culture, be fair and inquire about the other side of the story. Talk to us.

    We are not hard to find. A simple internet search will pour out hundreds of Turkish-American websites, associations, names, and leads into your living room or office. Fairness is all I ask.

    We love you all!

  • Archive – In Celebration Of Our Turkishness At The Threshold Of A New Millennium

    Archive – In Celebration Of Our Turkishness At The Threshold Of A New Millennium

    by Mahmut Esat OZAN
    mozan@webtv.net

    WHO WAS A ROMAN? WHO WAS AN OTTOMAN? WHO IS A TURK?

    Before answering these questions above, let us pose another one, “What are the similarities existing among the old citizens of the Roman and Ottoman Empires and the contemporary inhabitants of modern Turkey?” Well, here’s the answer: We must acknowledge and accept the fact that all three of them have the same social make-up. In the framework pertaining to the societal composition of the Roman and Ottoman Empires, one does not notice any racial, ethnic, or even religious alienations caused by prejudices injurious to the running of a society.

    In the Roman populace, as well as in the Ottoman one, every citizen was known as either a Roman, or an Ottoman. The same has been true for those living within the confines of the new Turkish nation created by its founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. In Turkey, every citizen, regardless of his or her ethnic, religious, and political background, is known and referred to as a Turk, no hyphens are necessary.

    Not so long ago, in Miami, Florida, a political asylum case involving a young Turkish citizen, reached the Immigration and Naturalization Department’s desk. What I am relating now is the true account of events which took place.

    In the past I was offered work in which I could be of help in interpreting in various court cases involving Turkish nationals. The young man in our story was a Turkish citizen of Kurdish extraction. He reluctantly fled his homeland, his birthplace, leaving his family, his girl friend and others behind. His adventures, spanning half of the globe were in search of a safe haven. His words are revealed here with the condition that his real identity is kept secret. Hasan Volkan is not his real name, of course.

    Hasan had been fighting for his life in order to escape those who were pursuing him relentlessly to punish him because he had repeatedly refused to kill for the dreaded PKK. While being interviewed by the US agents of the I N S(Immigration and Naturalization Service), he kept on saying he left Turkey because he was not interested in jeopardizing his life for a cause that was alien to his beliefs. He thought that staying in Turkey would bring about his early demise.

    In order not to burden the reader with the whole account of Hasan’s plight, which I related in an earlier essay, I would like to reveal here that, after three years of hiding in the USA, he is now back in Turkey and has rejoined his family and his girl friend. The last I heard from him is that he was about to get married.

    While I was helping him with the INS, he had made some interesting statements. One in particular was very meaningful. Here’s what Hasan told the INS attorney in Turkish:

    “In Turkey today we have a mosaic of all kinds of ethnic people representing many different backgrounds. We have Kurds, like myself, we have Laz people, we have Pomaks, Bosnaks(Bosnians), Albanians, we have Cerkez, we have Tatars, Cecens(Chechnians), we have Ajems(Iranians), Assirians, Arabs, Armenians, and Greeks. We even have Gypsies During the years before the PKK, these people all called themselves Turks and used to live in harmony in each other’s company, complementing one another in their own way, living in peace in a country my dear mother referred to as Gulistan(land ofroses). Hasan was referring to Turkey and he was saying, “no one was considered a step child there. He further told the INS interviewer that the only thing separating one person from another was his financial status in life. He said his family was in the home furnishings business, and it was known as a “well-to-do” family.

    On The Threshold Of A New Millennium

    The 20th Century is almost over. The year 1999 will be the very last span of time before humanity will embark into a new millennium. It is anybody’s guess how posterity will record these turbulent past hundred years.

    I wonder how historians will judge this century in the next millennium. It began with the dream of universal peace, but saw two tragic world wars, the birth of the atomic bomb, a ‘Police Action’ in Korea, and a costly ‘Vietnam experience’, plus a hundred smaller wars, and now it is coming to an end despite the ravages of dreaded terrorism, with a renewed hope for international harmony.

    Over-Population? It’s Everybody’s Baby

    The above heading actually comes from a bumper sticker I remember seeing some twenty years ago. But the words it contains are much more persuasive today than they were in the Seventies. Nevertheless, all levity aside, the world’s population in 1900 was a mere l.5 billion, a figure almost matching the number of inhabitants living in Communist China today. In that year, 1900, one of the greatest military minds and one of the greatest emancipators who ever lived, Mustafa Kemal, was a 19 year old young man. The world at large was yet to discover his genius. All Turks know this as a factual certainty, that if it weren’t for Kemal, who later on became ATATURK, the father of his nation, there would be no one today who would be addressed as a Turk, and no one would be left to elucidate the pride exhibited in the significance of the world “TURK.”

    We Emerged with Our Heads High

    I remember clearly the 10th anniversary of the Republic of Turkey. The whole country was singing, including us, the students in the Ortakoy preparatory section of Galatasaray, on the shores of the Bosphorus, the memorable words of a catchy tune “CIKTIK ACIK ALINLA,” the stirring musical composition of the day. This patriotic song was saying proudly that in a short 10 years Turks had created 15 million young people of “all ages.”

    During one of those days, on a warm spring afternoon, we were able to view our dear President, Gazi Mustafa Kemal Pasha, (three years before he was given the name of ATATURK) riding in a convertible limousine, sitting next to the Duke of Windsor, the future Edward VIII, the King of England.

    It seems that after all those years, and despite what seems to be an unsurmountable prejudice piled up against them coming from all corners of the globe and overlooking the drawbacks, real and contrived, Turks are still able to celebrate what is proudly known as ‘TURKISHNESS.’ Once again, going back to what we were discussing earlier, we see that there was no need for nobility in the Ottoman Empire. Any Muslim, even one who converted from Christianity, had the chance to rise all the way to become a VEZIR. The world would witness this type of opportunity in the USA centuries later.

    Ever since Alparslan, the Seljuk Turk military leader’s victory over the Eastern Roman Emperor Romanus VI in 107l, the way up the ladder of success began in the military. If an ordinary citizen wanted to get somewhere in the power system, he had to attend a military school.

    Many great men in Turkish history began their illustrious lives in this fashion. A May, 1996 article of mine in this newspaper, “TURKS’ LOVE AFFAIR WITH THEIR MILITARY’” is a good indication of this complex relationship between the public and their military institutions.

    Unlike other societies, in the Turkish one it was the Military that sided with the common people. It still is the Military that extricates the country straying from the course designated for Turks by their great leader, Kemal Ataturk.

    Someone in the soldierly stature of NAPOLEON BONAPARTE had once made a statement which illustrates what the concept of “military” meant to the Turks. They were invincible then, they may still be counted on the premise today. In 1799, after he returned to France from his inconclusive Egyptian campaign in the Ottoman lands, he related anecdotes about an encounter he had in the city of Acra, where after a long siege of the area, he chose to retreat before the Turkish forces. Napoleon’s words were, “Gentlemen, my conclusion is that Turks can be killed, but never vanquished.”

    Testimonials Which Keep Us Turks Going

    Recently, a letter writer said the following in an English language publication, “…I’ve been in Turkey 8 months, and I intend to spend the rest of my life somewhere in your country”…You have made me feel most welcome…I am proud to be living here, and I am so pleased that I chose Turkey rather than Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, or France.” I’m not able to decipher why the letter writer mentioned two of the most backward lands in the same sentence with France, but I appreciate his admiration for Turkey. There was another person with similar laudatory words for Turkey and the Turks. This one was not just a regular letter-writer, his name was Charles VII, the King of Sweden, who wrote the following letter to his sister Ulrique-Eleanore in 1772:
    “I was going to be a prisoner in Poltava(Russian territory at that time); that would have been my death. I was saved on the shores of the Bugh River. Then the danger became more imminent…again I was saved. But today I am a prisoner of the Turks. What fire, steel, and floods were not able to do, the Turks did. I don’t have chains on my feet. I am not in jail, either. I am free, free to do whatever I like. But still I am a prisoner – a prisoner of affection, of generosity, of nobility, of courtesy. The Turks have tied me with this diamond chain. Oh! If you knew how sweet it is to live as a free slave with people so affectionate, so noble, and so gentle!”

    Who Is A Turk, Anyway? Ask Any Turkish Citizen!

    If you listen to the rancorous, vindictive and vengeful words of Lloyd George, the fallen one-time Prime Minister of a dying British Empire, you will be amazd to hear how uncivilized a so-called ‘gentleman’ could be. He and his First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill, by his side, suffered collectively one of the worst military defeats at the hands of Mustafa Kemal and his legendary defenders of Gallipoli in 1914. Here are the ugly words the British Prime Minister Lloyd George uttered when he was about to launch the invasion of that disastrous Dardanelles campaign:

    “The Turks are a human cancer, a creeping agony in the flesh of the lands they misgovern, rotting every fiber of life…I am glad that the Turk is to be called to a final account for his long record of infamy against humanity.”

    Well, George, listen to the words of another observer, only this time, a more objective and much more civilized one than yourself. His name is David Hotham. He is a 1975 TIMES correspondent, who writes the following about Turks in his book simply called TURKEY. He might as well be referring indirectly to our TURKISHNESS when he says:

    “The Turk is unusually full of contradictions. Not only has he East and West in him, European and Asian, but an intense pride combined with an acute inferiority complex; a deep xenophobia with an overwhelming friendliness and hospitality to strangers; a profound need for flattery with an absolute disregard for what anybody thinks of him.”

    These last few lines of an honest observer such as Mr. Hotham indicate that TURKS are, indeed, cut fom a different cloth. In the case of the British Empire, the colonial masters were all “stiff upper-lipped” British, the epitomy of class consciousness, condescendence and conceit. They were, conversely, the opposite of Turks, the descendents of tolerant, democratically imbued, down-to-earth people, who never interfered with the social, religious freedoms of the subjects they conquered. For them magnanimity was not an outlandish dictionary word. They lived it in the past and they are still living it today. They loved their conquering heroes then, they still revere them today. Turkey is a place where the word ‘military’ has been an inspiring solace for them, whereas the same word has been branding fear in the hearts of others.

  • Archive – TURKISH FORUM LETTER TO ROBERT FISK FROM USA

    Archive – TURKISH FORUM LETTER TO ROBERT FISK FROM USA

    To: Letters@independent.co.uk
    Cc: editor@independent.co.uk
    Subject: Article by Robert Fisk “You’re talking nonsense, Mr Ambassador”

    TISK-TISK, ROBERT FISK (Or shame on you Mr. know-it-all.)

    (An Editorial)

    Mahmut Esat Ozan
    Chairman -Editorial Board
    The Turkish Forum

    Mr. Fisk, there is nothing worse in this world than being labeled a “know-it-all”. A person by that title is one who pretends to know something about everything but really knows nothing about anything . Since the knowledge of things you try to write about does not seem so great, you shouldn’t mind my asking you if you were familiar with the colloquialism we use in this country’s jargon, ( Tisk-Tisk) , an expression composed of two words which when it is placed in front of the name of an unfortunate person such as yours, it connotes that the person in question had done a shameful deed. And speaking of shameful deeds, Mr. Fisk, you seem to be ahead of many we know. You appear to be a genuine expert in that field. I, for one, have been noticing your irrational, biased, and prejudiccial behavior through the years, vis-à-vis the venerable nation of Turks. Every article you write concerning the Turks is replete with offensive passages, undeserved accusations, at times innuendoes, at others out and out lies hurled against them, the Turks about whom you claim they initiated the very first alleged genocide of the Twentieth century and decimated the Ottoman Armenians. The very latest of one of those irresponsible recriminations appeared in your latest drivels involving the Pope’s visit to Syria. You’ve been complaining that in the past 15 years 15 million Christians have abandoned their homes in the largely Muslim world.

    What baffles me is the way you manipulate this piece of ordinary news and very cunningly relate it to your favorite subject “the alleged Armenian genocide by the Ottoman Turks.” You seem to be stuck on this one subject and sound like a broken record every time you bring it up. 

    The newest form of your idiosyncrasy, showing your obsession in defending the Armenian causes, is apparent in your following sentence: “Turkey’s genocide of its Armenian community in 1915 left the bones of one and a half million Christians across Anatolia and what is now northern Syria.” Really, Mr. Fisk what possible connection could you find between the visit of the head of world Catholicism and the alleged ‘genocidal events which may have taken place over eight decades ago. Allow me to read your twisted mind, Mr. Fisk. You are an incorrigible Turcophobe. You cannot help yourself. Chances are either you were born with that affliction or someone inculcated that prejudice into your feeble brain when you were most vulnerable to discrimination involving the Turks. In your last article you are quoting an obscure “Dr.Jarjour, whoever he may be, and whatever weight his words may carry. You tell us that this so-called Dr. instructs us, ‘-somewhat defensively- that the present-day Christian exodus is primarily economic.’

    Nevertheless, you quote from him, or you extract from this poor fellow’s words the following quotation:: “I wouldn’t say at all that there is a religious factor , except in some cases like Turkey where Christians have been a little pressured recently.” Honestly Dr. Jarjour, or whatever your name is, and you Mr. Fisk, what was that ‘little pressure’ Turks inflicted on the Christians in Turkey? Are you referring to the Turkish government’s recent expenditures in renovating the Greek Orthodox Patriarchy building in Fener, in Istanbul?, or are you referring to the acquittal of a Syrian Armenian Priest who was accused to have made statements that his ancestors were the victims of a Turkish genocide in 1919? You were not fair , nor were you specific when Dr.Jarjour was talking to you against Turks.

    You see, Mr. Fisk, I am proud to belong to that honorable nation of ‘Turks’, whose early ancestors brought civilization to the European continent, when its inhabitants were still wallowing in muddy huts and tribes decimated each other in fratricidal animalistic wars. Ottoman Turks, even then, knew how to vaccinate people against diseases caused by bacteriological factors. They were reaping the benefits of time-telling devices such as clocks etc. when the Europeans were about to discover the uses of ‘sundials’. A newly produced documentary film called, Empire of Faith narrated by the British actor, Ben Kingsley, of the ‘Ghandi’ fame was Extolling the superiority of the Muslim world. More than half of the presentation was consecrated to the achievements of the Turks in various fields, other than military, let alone their legendary tolerance and magnanimity in treating differing religions when Europe imposed on the Jews the cursed inquisitions and forced conversions.

    When no Christian country wanted to admit into their domain any Jew expelled from Spain and Portugal, it was the Turkish Sultan ‘Beyazit’ who welcomed them into his vast empire to come and settle there and flourish in freedom of religion, and the pursuit of their own language, culture and trade..

    Turks even sent sea-faring galleons to Spain to transport these unfortunate people, free of charge, to any and all points of their realm. Turks, for centuries, helped to enlighten your ancestors. Sometime it was a losing battle. Europeans learned from my ancestors, but they, in turn derided them at every chance they had.

    There were, however, intellects such as the renown British anthropologist and historian Edson L. Clark (1827-1913) who said in his “Nations of the World Series,1900,N.Y. (pp. 84-87.) that the Turks whose honor and the dignity you have been pummeling and mauling these many years, were, and I quote: “…far better men and far abler rulers than the wretched tyrants whom they suppressed….the Turks were in advance, not of their Christian subjects alone, but of the greater part of Christian Europe.”

    Mr. Fisk, I know that you British do not consider yourselves European.

    However, you must admit that you live on the European continent and are a British Commonwealth member state of the European Union. What I am driving at, Mr. Fisk, is the fact that your ancestors were then as you are now, an inferior exemplification in comparison to the Turks. Let me elucidate a bit more by adding that you belong to the illustrious school of ‘Political Science’ of the turn of the century British Prime Minister, one Lloyd George who, when he was getting ready to “annihilate” the last remnants of the dying Ottoman Empire, was gloating by saying to the whole world the following:

    “The Turks are a human cancer, a creeping agony in the flesh of the lands they misgovern, rotting every fiber of life. I am glad that the Turk is to be called to a final account (referring to the impending Greek invasion of Asia Minor ) for his long record of infamy against humanity.”

    The British PM, not being an adequately -educated British subject, reminded me of you, Mr. Fisk. He was unaware of the above-mentioned quotation from Edson L. Clark. Thus, a rancorous, vindictive and vengeful Lloyd George, not Unlike yourself , launched a campaign, ‘doomed from the beginning’ in the Ottoman Turkish lands in Gallipoli, against those he called “human cancers” the Turks.

    Even though aided by the French and the Anzak military forces and the world’s most formidable naval armada, the Allied forces were repulsed. Lloyd George not only lost his post as the Prime Minister of his disgruntled country, but he lost his honor and his shirt, too, in the process. In addition he carried down with him, to the abyss, his favorite, but incompetent advisor Winston Churchill, who was the First Lord of the Admiralty. The glorious victor of the Dardanelles, the military genius of the Gallipoli campaign, the great Mustafa Kemal had taught them a lesson they never forgot. Lloyd George died as a broken, destitute soul after having sheepishly underestimated and unjustly denigrated the noble Turk.

    Let us hope that you, dear Mr. Fisk, may be spared such a predicament of fate.

    Recently a Letter writer said the following to an English language publication. “I have been living in Turkey 8 months, and I intend to spend the rest of my life somewhere in your country. You have made me most welcome.

    I’ m glad I chose your Turkey rather than England or France or any other European country. This gentleman’s words were familiar to me. I had read a passage from a Swedish king once. Hurriedly I checked my files and found what I was looking for. Mr. Fisk, I’d like to share Swedish King Charles VII’s words with you. And again, knowing the stuff you are made of, I suspect you may not enjoy it as much as the Friends of the Turks. Here’s that full quotation he wrote to his sister Ulrique-Eleanor in 1772:

    “I was going to be a prisoner in Poltova, (Russian territory at that time) that would have been my death. I was saved on the shores of Bugh River. Then the danger became more imminent…I was saved. But today I am a prisoner of the Turks. What fire, steel, and floods were not able to do the Turks did. I don’t have chains on my feet. I am not in jail, either. I am free, free to do whatever I like . But I still am a prisoner- a prisoner of affection, of generosity, of nobility, of courtesy. The Turks have tied me with this diamond chain. Oh! if you knew how sweet it is to live as a free slave with people so affectionate, so noble, so gentle.” I hope you are listening Lloyd George, wherever you may be.

    I’ve been asking myself the following question over and over again concerning you and people like you: “What is their problem.?” I try to answer my very own questions. I find no answers. I am unable to decipher the origin of your arrogance and your disrespectful behavior when it comes to Turks.

    Your defense of the Armenian “riff-raffs who have made a profitable industry of accusing the Ottoman Turks of having perpetrated the most heinous of all crimes, the crime of genocide, and in the same breath denying that they have not even bloodied a single Turkish nose. When neutral, non-Turkish historians accept that for every Armenian who was killed in that civil war, within a World War in 1914-1918, four (4) Muslim Turks, Kurds, Sircassians, and Azerbaijanis lost their precious lives. But I guess you don’t pay too much attention to that because they were not Christian. Most observers can not tell us where this hatred for Turks is emerging. You are a part of that equation. The only source of frustration from which you are suffering may be the result of your government’s disability to prove that Turks were guilty of a premeditated so-called genocide. There was not an iota of evidence found in the infamous trials held on the island of Malta conducted by the British occupiers of the Ottoman capital, Istanbul, when they arrested and took with them a goodly portion of Ottoman government functionaries to the Island of Malta and imprisoned them for over a year, trying to extract from them juicy confessions, but at the end they totally failed. The final communiqué sent to Lord Curzon was very disappointing to the Armenians and their ‘bootlicker’ friend, such as you Mr. Fisk. The royal report had said at the time: 

    I REGRET TO INFORM YOUR LORDSHIP HERE WAS NOTHING THEREIN WHICH COULD

    BE USED AS EVIDENCE AGAINST THE TURKS WHO ARE PRESENTLY BEING DETAINED AT MALTA…NO CONRETE FACTS BEING GIVEN WHICH COULD CONSTITUTE SATISFACTORY INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE…THE REPORTS IN QUESTION DO NOT APPEAR, IN ANY CASE,TO CONTAIN EVIDENCE AGAINST THE TURKS.”

    Nevertheless, Mr. Fisk , if you still are unconvinced, then please listen to what the U.S. government had to say. The American General James G. Harbord, of the U.S. government’s investigative commission, sent to Anatolia in the fall of 1919 by none other than President Woodrow Wilson, declared unequivocally the following in his official report. General James G. Harbord concluded : The Turks and the Armenians lived in peace, side by side for centuries; that the Turks suffered as much as the Armenians at the time of relocations, that at the start of World War I and before, Armenians never had anything approaching a majority of the population in the territories they call : Western Armenia”; they would not have a majority even if all the deported Armenians returned; and the claims that returning Armenians would be in danger were not justified.”

    Mr. Fisk, have you read the forged Adonian papers?, have you watched the often exhibited painting of the Armenian skulls piled up in a grotesque heap claiming that it was the Turks who had caused it to happen? Well, the photograph Armenians claim was taken in 1915, actually a stolen copy of a painting done in oil by a late Russian painter, named Vasily Vereschagin. The canvas is dated 1905 and it is still hanging in the Tretyakov Art Gallery in Moscow today. Now Mr. Fisk, I got a hunch you’ll deny this too, as you always do, instead you will invoke the infamous Hitler quotation as a last resort. Here is a rebuttal for it, also. Hitler may have been a monster as most claim, but nobody yet accused him for being a stupid individual.

    According to Prof. Dr. Turkkaya Ataov,Chairman, International Relations Division, Ankara,Turkey, and the Nuremberg, Germany NAZI War Crimes Trials, that invented quotation does not hold any water. Adolf Hitler never made such an idiotic statement in his life. Prof. Ataov says, however, that Hitler said a few choice words about the Armenians, and that is true. He made one reference to the Armenians in a talk delivered on December 12, 1942, in which he described them as unreliable, (Unzuferlassig) and dangerous,(Gefahrlich). It is rumored also that Hitler was furious about the Armenians when he used those adjectives. I’m afraid those two adjectives were also appropriate to describe you and your unfortunate task against Turks. So, let us say once more: Tisk-Tisk, Robert Fisk. (Shame on you.)

    meeozan@turkishforum,com