Category: America

What is the name of following organization?

This is VERY INTERESTING!!!!

Even if you aren’t a sports fan this is very interesting!

36 have been accused of spousal abuse

7 have been arrested for fraud

19 have been accused of writing bad checks

117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses

3 have done time for assault

Cannot get a credit card due to bad credit

14 have been arrested on drug-related charges

8 have been arrested for shoplifting

21 currently are defendants in lawsuits,

And
84 have been arrested for drunk driving
In the last year

Can You guess which organization this is?

Give up yet?
Scroll down,

Neither,
it’s the 535 members of the
United States Congress

The same group of Idiots that crank out
Hundreds of new laws each year
Designed to keep the rest of us in line.

You
Gotta pass this one on!

October 24, 2009
Genocide conference in NYC

As Genocide Continues to Shape World History, Landmark Conference will Seek Answers and Understanding

International Group of Scholars Gather to Focus Lens on Genocide through examination of Raphael Lemkin, Advocate and Initiator of United Nations Genocide Convention in 1948
Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:30am EDT

NEW YORK, Oct. 21 /PRNewswire/ — Current news headlines are a sad reminder
that genocide has been, and continues to be, a stain on human existence in all
corners of the world, from Rwanda to Armenia, to Darfur and beyond. Those
headlines also underscore the urgency of addressing every instance of the
crime, particularly in light of a statement made by Adolf Hitler before
invading Poland in 1939: “… I put ready my Death’s Head units, with orders
to send to death, mercilessly and without compassion, all men, women, and
children of the Polish race or language. … Who, after all, still talks
nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?”

Inscribed on the wall of the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C., that quote
illustrates that Hitler was emboldened by the lack of international response
to Turkey’s killing of more than a million ethnic Armenians during World War
I. By contrast, however, that episode in human history was also the spark that
led to the tireless efforts of one man to define the crime of genocide under
international law and enable perpetrators, such as a recently arrested suspect
in the Rwandan genocide, to be charged and brought to justice. That man was
Raphael Lemkin, whose life-long devotion to the cause not only coined and
defined the word “genocide,” but led to the 1948 United Nations Convention on
the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

The invaluable contributions of Lemkin will be the focus of an international
public conference, “Genocide and Human Experience: Raphael Lemkin’s Thought
and Vision,” to be held Sunday, November 15, from 9:00 a.m.-6:30 p.m., at the
Center for Jewish History, 15 West 16th Street in New York City. Bringing
together for the first time an international group of historians, political
scientists, anthropologists, philosophers, philanthropists, and legal
authorities to explore the tremendous legacy and impact of Lemkin’s work, the
landmark conference will also delve into perpetually relevant questions of
human rights and the nature of human behavior.

“Raphael Lemkin died in 1959, and while few people today may recognize his
name, most feel the impact of his work,” said Michael Glickman, Center for
Jewish History COO. “As a young Jewish lawyer in Warsaw almost 90 years ago,
Lemkin could not understand why it was a crime for an Armenian youth to murder
the Turkish official responsible for the attempted destruction of the Armenian
community in the Ottoman Empire, but not a crime for the government to murder
more than a million Armenians. That question inspired Lemkin to devote the
rest of his life to fight against such horrors and to wage a campaign of
international advocacy that led to the United Nations Genocide Convention.”

A wealth of Lemkin’s correspondence, along with papers documenting Lemkin’s
work as an activist, are housed in the archives of the American Jewish
Historical Society at the Center for Jewish History. The documents include
correspondences with public figures such as Eleanor Roosevelt, General Dwight
D. Eisenhower, and Pearl S. Buck; Lemkin’s unfinished manuscript History of
Genocide; and archival footage of interviews from the 1950s. The Lemkin
archives will also be the subject of a special exhibition at the Center for
Jewish History in partnership with Yeshiva University Museum scheduled to run
from November 16, 2009, to March 19, 2010.

Even though the crime of genocide is often understood as mass murder alone,
Lemkin viewed genocide as a nuanced concept, which shapes and is determined by
the spheres of economics, law, society, and culture. Through Lemkin’s archival
writings, the conference will focus on these gradations of genocide, as Lemkin
understood them.

Opening the conference will be an historical overview and brief biographical
account of Lemkin’s life, legal and other accomplishments, and perspectives on
the human condition, setting the context for the panel discussions to follow.
Topics to be explored by three different panels fall under the broad subjects
of Lemkin’s perspective on cultural genocide, the complex economic and social
issues surrounding genocide, and the challenging relationship between
international law and genocide.

Among the distinguished list of presenters are Vartan Gregorian, President,
Carnegie Corporation of New York; Peter Balakian, Colgate College; Donna-Lee
Frieze, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia; Alexander Laban Hinton,
Rutgers University; Jim Fussell, PreventGenocide.org; Tanya Elder, American
Jewish Historical Society; Berel Lang, Wesleyan University; Benjamin
Valentino, Dartmouth College; Lawrence Woocher, US Institute of Peace; Hilary
Earl, Nipissing University, North Bay, Ontario; Benedict F. Kiernan, Yale
University; Muhamed Mesic, Bosnia; William A. Schabas, National University of
Ireland; and Steven Leonard Jacobs, University of Alabama.

“It is the hope of the Center and the conference sponsors that this historic
gathering will not only provide some clearer understandings of both the
extraordinary courage and dynamic intellect of one individual, but will also
clarify the challenges that lie ahead in confronting the evil of genocide in
the modern world,” continued Mr. Glickman. “It is said that those who do not
learn from history are doomed to repeat it. ‘Genocide and Human Experience:
Raphael Lemkin’s Thought and Vision’ represents one small step to teach the
lessons humankind so desperately needs, as history continues to repeat itself
in the 21st century.”

The conference is open to the general public. For more information, visit
www.cjh.org/lemkin; or to register, log on to www.smarttix.com or call
212-868-4444.

SOURCE Center for Jewish History

Cathy Callegari, +1-212-579-1370, [email protected]

URL:

October 23, 2009
Armenia Thanks U.S. For Help In Normalizing Turkey Relations

Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian and Tina Kaidanow, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, meet in Yerevan.

October 21, 2009

YEREVAN — Armenia’s President Serzh Sarkisian has told visiting U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Tina Kaidanow expressed gratitude on behalf of the Armenian nation to the U.S. leadership for its contribution to the normalization of relations with Turkey, RFE/RL’s Armenian Service reports.

Kaidanow held talks with Sarkisian and Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian in Yerevan this week.

Sarkisian told Kaidanow that normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia is very important for Yerevan, and to stability in the region.

Kaidanow said the United States is pleased with the progress in Turkish-Armenian relations, adding that relations should be established in reasonable terms and without preconditions.

Kaidanow stressed the importance of democratic reforms in Armenia, especially paying attention to the recently endorsed amnesty, which, as she said, was a very important step toward further democratization.

In a separate meeting with Nalbandian, Kaidanow discussed the Nagorno-Karabakh issue.

https://www.rferl.org/a/Armenia_Thanks_US_For_Help_In_Normalizing_Turkey_Relations/1857541.html

October 21, 2009
New U.S. Missile-Defense Plan

Poland Ready To Participate In

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden talks to the press in Warsaw.

October 21, 2009

By Brian Whitmore

(RFE/RL) — Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk says Warsaw is ready to take part in a new, reconfigured U.S. missile-defense system in Europe.

Tusk made his comments after meeting U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, who is in Warsaw as he kicks off a tour of Eastern European capitals, part of an effort to reassure allies in the region that Washington’s “reset” in relations with Russia won’t come at their expense.

“Poland sees this concept, this project, this new configuration of missile defense, as very interesting and necessary. And we are ready to take part in it to the extent that is needed,” Tusk said at a joint press conference with Biden.

Officials in many former communist Eastern European countries are concerned their security interests will be sacrificed as U.S. President Barack Obama seeks to improve relations with Russia, which sank to a post-Cold War low under the George W. Bush administration.

Polish and Czech officials are especially nervous about Obama’s decision in September to reconfigure U.S. missile-defense plans in Europe.

Obama scrapped a Bush administration plan to place interceptor missiles in Poland and an advanced radar in the Czech Republic in favor of a more mobile system that will initially rely on sea-based interceptors. Moscow fiercely opposed the earlier plan.

U.S. officials say the new plan is designed to counter a current threat from short- and intermediate-range Iranian missiles. The White House and Pentagon say Obama’s proposal is superior to the Bush plan, which was designed to defend against a long-range missile threat from Iran that does not yet exist.

“Simply put, our missile plan is better security for NATO and is better security for Poland,” Biden said.

Obama’s missile shield plan would initially deploy sea-based SM-3 interceptor missiles in 2011. An updated version would later be positioned at sea and land — possibly in Poland and the Czech Republic — in 2015.

The White House says a more advanced system would be built in 2018 and 2020, with the capability to intercept long-range Iranian missiles, should that need arise.

No ‘Reset’ For U.S. Allies

But for many Eastern Europeans, the missile-defense plan was less about Iran and more about their own fears of Moscow.

Czech and Polish officials in particular believed hosting components of a missile-defense system provided symbolic security against a threat from Russia, and saw Obama’s move as a dangerous capitulation to Moscow.

Frantisek Sulc, a reporter for the Czech weekly “Tyden” and the co-author of a book on missile defense, says despite being NATO members and beneficiaries of the alliance’s Article 5 collective security guarantee, many Poles and Czechs still fear Moscow.

“It is psychological. The Poles and the Czechs want to have bigger assurances because of the past — because of the history with the Soviet Union, because of the invasions, because of the sphere of influence. There is still a fear of Russia,” Sulc says.

Sulc says that those in favor of deploying the radar in the Czech Republic country “usually mentioned that if the United States troops would be stationed here then we would be more secure. The physical presence, for a portion of the population of the Czech Republic, is really important.”

In an interview before his trip with the Polish daily “Rzeczpospolita,” Biden said the United States would not sign any agreements with Moscow that harm the security of its allies in Central and Eastern Europe. The United States will decide “nothing about you without you,” Biden said.

Biden also defended the Russia reset in general, saying, “improving the mood between the United States and Russia will contribute to improving security in Europe and will bring benefits to our allies.”

Biden is expected to propose that Poland host SM-3 interceptors to target short- and intermediate-range Iranian missiles. Obama’s plan calls for initially deploying sea-based interceptors before later adding the land-based SM-3 missiles.

Warsaw also wants Washington to deploy a Patriot interceptor missile battery to Poland to help upgrade the country’s air defenses. Under the Bush plan, Warsaw had secured a commitment for the temporary deployment of Patriot missiles several times a year.

Biden’s trip marks the second time in recent months the White House has dispatched the vice president to calm jittery U.S. allies over Washington’s policy of improving ties with Moscow. Biden visited Georgia and Ukraine in July.

October 21, 2009

Armenia: the end of the debate?

By Gwynne Dyer

Published October 21, 2009

THE FIRST great massacre of the 20th century happened in eastern Anatolia 94 years ago. Armenians all over the world insist that their ancestors who died in those events were the victims of a deliberate genocide, and that there can be no reconciliation with the Turks until they admit their guilt. But now the Armenians back home have made a deal.

On October 10, the Turkish and Armenian foreign ministers signed a accord in Zurich that reopens the border between the two countries, closed since 1993, and creates a joint historical commission to determine what actually happened in 1915. It is a triumph for reason and moderation, so the nationalists in both countries attacked it at once.

The most anguished protests came from the Armenian diaspora: eight million people living mainly in the United States, France, Russia, Iran and Lebanon. There are only three million people living in Armenia itself, and remittances from the diaspora are twice as large as the country’s entire budget, so the views of overseas Armenians matter.

Unfortunately, their views are quite different from those of the people who actually live in Armenia. For Armenians abroad, making the Turks admit that they planned and carried out a genocide is supremely important. Indeed, it has become a core part of their identity.

For most of those who are still in Armenia, getting the Turkish border re-opened is a higher priority. Their poverty and isolation are so great that a quarter of the population has emigrated since the border was closed sixteen years ago, and trade with their relatively rich neighbour to the west would help to staunch the flow.

Moreover, the agreement does not require Armenia to give back the Armenian-populated parts of Azerbaijan, its neighbour to the east. Armenia’s conquest of those lands in 1992-94 was why Turkey closed the border in the first place (many Turks see the Turkic-speaking Azeris as their “little brothers”), so in practical terms Armenian president Serge Sarkisian has got a very good deal.

The communities of the diaspora, however, believe the Armenian government has sold them out on the genocide issue. Their remittances are crucial to Armenia, so President Serge Sarkisian has spent the past weeks travelling the world, trying to calm their fury. In the end, he will probably succeed, if only because they have nowhere else to go.

But can any practical consideration justify abandoning the traditional Armenian demand that Turkey admit to a policy of genocide? Yes it can, because it is probably the wrong demand to be making.

Long ago, when I was a budding historian, I got sidetracked for a while by the controversy over the massacres of 1915. I read the archival reports on British and Russian negotiations with Armenian revolutionaries after the Ottoman empire entered the First World War on the other side in early 1915. I even read the documents in the Turkish General Staff archives ordering the deportation of the Armenian population from eastern Anatolia later that year. What happened is quite clear.

The British and the Russians planned to knock the Ottoman empire out of the war quickly by simultaneous invasions of eastern Anatolia, Russia from the north and Britain by landings on Turkey’s south coast. So they welcomed the approaches of Armenian nationalist groups and asked them to launch uprisings behind the Turkish lines to synchronise with the invasions. The usual half-promises about independence were made, and the Armenian groups fell for it.

The British later switched their attack to the Dardanelles in an attempt to grab Istanbul, but they never warned their Armenian allies that the south-coast invasion was off. The Russians did invade, but the Turks managed to stop them. The Armenian revolutionaries launched their uprisings as promised, and the Turks took a terrible vengeance on the whole community.

Istanbul ordered the Armenian minority to be removed from eastern Anatolia on the grounds that their presence behind the lines posed a danger to Turkish defences. Wealthy Armenians were allowed to travel south to Syria by train or ship, but for the impoverished masses it was columns marching over the mountains in the dead of winter. They faced rape and murder at the hands of their guards, there was little or no food, and many hundreds of thousands died.

If genocide just means killing a lot of people, then this certainly was one. If genocide means a policy that aims to exterminate a particular ethnic or religious group, then it wasn’t. Armenians who made it alive to Syria, then also part of the Ottoman empire, were not sent to death camps. Indeed, they became the ancestors of today’s huge Armenian diaspora. Armenians living elsewhere in the empire, notably in Istanbul, faced abuse but no mass killings.

It was a dreadful crime, and only recently has the public debate in Turkey even begun to acknowledge it. It was not a genocide if your standard of comparison is what happened to the European Jews, but diaspora Armenians will find it very hard to give up their claim that it was. Nevertheless, the grown-ups are now in charge both in Armenia and in Turkey, and amazing progress is being made.

n Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.

=======================================================


	Latest Articles :: Gallery :: Books :: Directory :: Contact Coming Soon – Selected Book Chapters Podcasts Ideas1 Ideas2 Ideas3 TVO

GWYNNE DYER has worked as a freelance journalist, columnist, broadcaster and lecturer on international affairs for more than 20 years, but he was originally trained as an historian. Born in Newfoundland, he received degrees from Canadian, American and British universities, finishing with a Ph.D. in Military and Middle Eastern History from the University of London. He served in three navies and held academic appointments at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst and Oxford University before launching his twice-weekly column on international affairs, which is published by over 175 papers in some 45 countries.

His first television series, the 7-part documentary ‘War’, was aired in 45 countries in the mid-80s. One episode, ‘The Profession of Arms’, was nominated for an Academy Award. His more recent television work includes the 1994 series ‘The Human Race’, and ‘Protection Force’, a three-part series on peacekeepers in Bosnia, both of which won Gemini awards. His award-winning radio documentaries include ‘The Gorbachev Revolution’, a seven-part series based on Dyer’s experiences in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union in 1987-90, and ‘Millenium’, a six-hour series on the
emerging global culture.

Dyer’s major study “War”, first published in the 1980s, was completely revised and re-published in 2004. During this decade he has also written a trio of more contemporary books dealing with the politics and strategy of the post-9/11 world: ‘Ignorant Armies’ (2003), ‘Future: Tense’ (2004), and ‘The Mess They Made’ (2006). The latter was also published as ‘After Iraq’ in the US and the UK and as ‘Nach Iraq und Afghanistan’ inGermany.

His most recent projects are a book and a radio series called ‘Climate Wars’, dealing with the geopolitics of climate change. They have already been published and aired in some places, and will appear in most other major markets in the course of 2009.

=========================================================================

DYER, GWYNNE

Canadian Journalist/Producer

Gwynne Dyer is a Canadian journalist, syndicated columnist and military analyst. He is best known for his documentary television series, War which echoed the peace movement’s growing concern over the threat of nuclear war in the early 1980s. Nominated for an Oscar in 1985, it was based on his own military experience and extensive study.

After serving in the naval reserves of Canada, the United States, and Britain, Dyer completed his doctoral studies in Military History at King’s College, University of London in 1973. He lectured on military studies for the next four years at the Royal Military Academy in Sandhurst, England before producing a seven-part radio series, Seven Faces of Communism for the CBC and ABC in 1978. This quickly led to another radio series, War, in six-parts, 1981. Based on this series, he was invited by the National Film Board of Canada, the country’s public film producer to enlarge it into a seven-part film series in 1983. Upon release to critical acclaim, the series was broadcast in forty-five countries.

War was a reflection of Dyer’s own growing concern about the proliferation of new technology, its impact on the changing nature of warfare and the growing threat of nuclear annihilation. Filmed in ten countries and with the participation of six national armies, it examined the nature, evolution and consequences of warfare. It featured interviews with top level NATO and Warsaw Pact military leaders and strategists, many of whom spoke to the Western media for the first time. The series argued that in an era of total war, professional armies were no longer able to fulfill their traditional roles. The growth of nationalism, conscript armies and nuclear technology had brought the world perilously close to Armageddon. War offered the unique perspective of the soldier from the rigorous training of young U.S. marine recruits at the Parris Island Training Depot in South Carolina, to the field exercises conducted by NATO and Warsaw Pact countries in Europe. It presented military officers from both sides talking frankly about how nuclear technology had changed their profession and follows them as they vividly describe how any superpower conflict would inevitably lead to an all out nuclear war. Dyer argued that the danger posed by the explosive mix of ideology and nuclear technology could only be mitigated by a total elimination of nuclear arsenals.

This award-winning series was soon followed by another production for the National Film Board of Canada in 1986, The Defence of Canada, an examination of Canada’s military role on the international scene. Following similar arguments postulated in War, Dyer called for Canada to set an example by rethinking its position in NATO and NORAD. He maintained his ties in the Soviet Union and in 1988-90 produced a six-part radio series The Gorbachev Revolution which followed the thunderous changes occurring in Eastern Europe. He served as a military commentator in Canada during the Gulf War and in 1994 his series The Human Race was broadcast nationally on the CBC. It was a personal enquiry into the roots, nature and future of human politics and the threat posed by tribalism, nationalism and technology to the world’s environment. He continues to publish his syndicated column on international affairs which is published on over 300 papers in some 30 countries.

-Manon Lamontagne

Gwynne Dyer

GWYNNE DYER. Born in St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada, 17 April 1943. Educated at the Memorial University of Newfoundland, B.A. in History, 1963; Rice University in Houston, Texas, U.S.A., M.A. in Military History, 1966; King’s College, University of London, Ph.D. in Military and Middle Eastern History, 1973. Served as Reserve Naval Officer in Royal Canadian Naval Reserve, 1956-64, 1966-68; U.S. Naval Reserve, 1964-66; British Royal Navy Reserve, 1968-73. Employed as a lecturer in military history, Canadian Forces College in Toronto, Ontario; senior lecturer in war studies, Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst, England, 1973-77; producer of various radio and television special series from 1978; syndicated columnist, international affairs from 1973. Recipient: International Film Festival Awards; International Film Festival Awards, 1984; Best Writing Gemini for The Space Between, 1986.

TELEVISION DOCUMENTARY SERIES

1983 War (co-writer/host)
1986 Defence of Canada
1994 The Human Race (host)

FILMS

The Space Between, 1986 (co-writer/host); Harder Than It Looks, 1987; Escaping from History, 1994 (writer); The Gods of Our Fathers, 1994 (writer); The Tribal Mind, 1994 (writer); The Bomb Under the World, 1994 (writer).

RADIO

Seven Faces of Communism, 1978; Goodbye War, 1979 (writer/narrator); War, 1981; The Gorbachev Revolution, 1988-90; Millennium, 1996.

FURTHER READING

“Dyer’s Contrived Truth Doesn’t Tackle the Real Consequences.” Vancouver (Canada) Sun, 3 September 1994.

Dodds, Carolyn. “Too Close for Comfort.” Saturday Night (Toronto, Canada), August 1988

“Recording a Global Culture.” Maclean’s (Toronto, Canada), 25 March, 1996.

See also Canadian Programming in English

October 21, 2009

TV Show Deepens Split Between Israel and Turkey

By NICHOLAS BIRCH, CHARLES LEVINSON and MARC CHAMPION

A war of words ignited by a new Turkish TV series depicting Israeli military atrocities escalated Friday, shaking what is probably Israel’s strongest partnership in the Middle East.

The first episode of the series, “Separation,” aired Wednesday on the public channel TRT, showed what appeared to be an Israeli soldier gunning down an unarmed Palestinian girl in a cul de sac. Shortly afterward, another soldier shoots a newborn baby.

The images sparked outrage in Israel. Labor unions said they would boycott Turkey as a vacation destination, and Israel summoned Turkey’s ambassador Thursday to lodge a protest. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said in a statement Thursday the series “would not be appropriate in an enemy country and certainly not in a state which maintains diplomatic relations with Israel.”

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu responded Friday by criticizing Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. He said a recent decision to exclude Israel from planned North Atlantic Treaty Organization exercises in central Turkey was made in response to public outrage in Turkey over Israel’s treatment of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip.

“While the tragedy in Gaza continues, nobody should expect us to put on military displays of this sort,” Mr. Davutoglu said.

As for the TV series, Mr. Davutoglu said: “Turkey is not a country based on censorship.”

Officials and analysts in both countries said the split reveals Ankara no longer needs or wants Israel the way it once did.

The two countries have long had strong diplomatic and trade relations, and Turkey has been a substantial buyer of Israeli military hardware. For years, Israeli pilots trained in Turkish airspace. As recently as August, Turkey took part in joint naval exercises with Israel.

But the ties were built in a period when Turkey felt hemmed in on all sides, analysts say. In the 1980s and 1990s, Turkey had poor relations with Iraq and shared with Israel a deep suspicion of Iran. It was also fighting a guerrilla war with Kurdish militants. In 1998, it came close to war with Syria. Turkey was also in conflict with Greece over Cyprus, while then communist Bulgaria and Armenia were historical and Cold War rivals. Ankara needed Israel’s military hardware and intelligence sharing.

“In the 1990s, Turkish foreign policy was guided by security issues, and that pushed Turkey closer to Israel,” says Kadri Gursel, a columnist for the centrist daily Milliyet.

But under Mr. Davutoglu and his boss, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey has worked hard to fix those problems and reintegrate into the region. This month, Turkey signed significant agreements with Armenia, Syria and Iraq.

“There is no need for this [partnership with Israel] anymore,” said Huseyin Bagci, professor of International Relations at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara.

Mr. Bagci predicts that Turkey increasingly will look to Italy, France and other suppliers to buy arms, rather than Israel.

The breakdown in relations also appears personal. Mr. Erdogan walked off the stage at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January after clashing with President Shimon Peres of Israel over the conflict in Gaza. In a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Erdogan was still simmering.

“If you look at Gaza, 1,500 people died, 5,000 people were wounded, infrastructure, the superstructures were all demolished. … What happened afterwards? There was nothing,” said Mr. Erdogan.

Israel and some Turkish analysts see an ideological component to the dispute, noting the Islamist roots of the ruling Justice and Development Party. “We’ve seen Turkey evolve and change since Erdogan’s Islamic party took power,” the senior Israeli official said.

Mr. Erdogan, in the interview, insisted his position wasn’t driven by identification with Muslim Palestinians, but by the need for honesty and fairness.

Turkish officials insist the relationship is far from dead. “Let’s make no mistake. We value a continuation of relations with Israel, but not at any cost,” said ruling-party official Suat Kiniklioglu.

Write to Charles Levinson at [email protected] and Marc Champion at [email protected]

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A9

October 21, 2009

Category: America

What is the name of following organization?

Genocide conference in NYC

Armenia Thanks U.S. For Help In Normalizing Turkey Relations

New U.S. Missile-Defense Plan

Poland Ready To Participate In

Armenia: the end of the debate?

Latest Articles :: Gallery :: Books :: Directory :: Contact

TV Show Deepens Split Between Israel and Turkey

By NICHOLAS BIRCH, CHARLES LEVINSON and MARC CHAMPION