Turkish Forum

Category: America

  • Fethullah Gulen: Infiltrating the U.S.

    Fethullah Gulen: Infiltrating the U.S.


    fetullah
    An ACT! for America Exclusive
    by Guy Rodgers

    www.actforamerica.org

    Fethullah Gulen: Infiltrating the U.S.  Through Our Charter Schools?
    For some time we have been researching a Turkish-based Islamist movement that has a significant network here in the United States. Given Turkey’s history of secular, democratic government, and some of the remarks made by President Obama in his recent speech there, many of our members and other readers will likely be surprised by what we have found.

    I suspect that even many who are well-read on the issue of Islamism are unfamiliar with the Fethullah Gulen Community (FGC), a movement a February 2009 article in the respected Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst labeled “Turkey’s third power.” Indeed, the article noted in its Key Points: “Turkey’s Islamist Gulen movement, while a powerful political force, is largely an unfamiliar entity to the West.”

    The FGC is named after Fethullah Gulen, a Turkish imam who now lives in the United States. He fled Turkey in 1998 to avoid prosecution on charges that he was attempting to undermine Turkey’s secular government with the objective of establish an Islamic government. Since Gulen’s arrival here the Department of Homeland Security tried to deport him, but he successfully fought the effort in federal court because it was ruled he was an individual with “extraordinary ability in the field of education” – although he has no formal education training.

    The FGC emerged in Turkey in the 1970’s. According to the Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst piece, Gulen stated that “in order to reach the ideal Muslim society ‘every method and path is acceptable, [including] lying to people.‘” This public acknowledgement of taqiyya (employing deception to advance Islam) is highly pertinent to Gulen’s activities here in the United States.

    A recent article in the Middle East Quarterly by Rachel Sharon-Kreskin titled “Fethullah Gulen’s Grand Ambition” sheds light on Gulen’s background:

    Gülen was a student and follower of Sheikh Sa’id-i Kurdi (1878-1960), also known as Sa’id-i Nursi, the founder of the Islamist Nur (light) movement. After Turkey’s war of independence, Kurdi demanded, in an address to the new parliament, that the new republic be based on Islamic principles. He turned against Atatürk and his reforms and against the new modern, secular, Western republic.

    Sharon-Kreskin documents how the FGC, in league with Turkey’s ruling party, Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi (AKP), has been successful in gradually moving Turkey away from its secular democratic governance, towards an Islamist state governed by Shariah law, and reorienting itself toward Iran. What’s more, other evidence suggests that Gulen’s ultimate goal may well be the resurrection of the Ottoman Empire so as to reinstate the Islamic Caliph. Clearly this has immensely serious ramifications for geo-political affairs in the Middle East as well as for the continued rise of radical Islam throughout the world.

    What makes Gulen particularly dangerous is his strategic and tactical means to achieving this goal. He oversees a worldwide network of businesses, schools, foundations and media outlets, with an estimated budget of 25 billion dollars. Here’s what Gulen had to say in a sermon in 1999 aired on Turkish television:

    You must move in the arteries of the system without anyone noticing your existence until you reach all the power centers … until the conditions are ripe, they [the followers] must continue like this. If they do something prematurely, the world will crush our heads, and Muslims will suffer everywhere, like in the tragedies in Algeria, like in 1982 [in] Syria … like in the yearly disasters and tragedies in Egypt. The time is not yet right. You must wait for the time when you are complete and conditions are ripe, until we can shoulder the entire world and carry it … You must wait until such time as you have gotten all the state power, until you have brought to your side all the power of the constitutional institutions in Turkey … Until that time, any step taken would be too early-like breaking an egg without waiting the full forty days for it to hatch. It would be like killing the chick inside. The work to be done is [in] confronting the world. Now, I have expressed my feelings and thoughts to you all-in confidence … trusting your loyalty and secrecy. I know that when you leave here-[just] as you discard your empty juice boxes, you must discard the thoughts and the feelings that I expressed here.

    Simply put, he is brilliantly and patiently employing taqiyya on a global scale, because this strategic approach is not confined to Turkey.

    Here in the U.S. the FGC runs over 90 charter public schools in at least 20 states. This was brought to our attention by ACT! for America members who actually have relatives who teach in one of these schools, an illustration of the growing reach of ACT! for America’s “eyes and ears” across our country. For obvious reasons we cannot reveal the identity of our sources.

    Our readers may be familiar with the numerous emails we have released regarding the operation of the Tarek ibn Zayed Academy (TiZA), a publicly funded charter school in Minnesota that is so blatantly Islamic in nature that the Minnesota Department of Education issued two citations against it and the ACLU is suing it. FGC schools appear to be very different, and reflect the Gulen’s exhortation to “move in the arteries of the system without anyone noticing your existence until you reach all the power centers…”

    Indeed, the fact that so little has been written about the FGC schools here in the U.S., as well as the accolades that have been accorded the FGC as a model of “moderation” by some in our government, would appear to confirm that the FGC and its schools are doing an excellent job of heeding Gulen’s exhortation and masking their true intent.

    During several discussions and emails with our sources inside FGC schools, I asked specifically if the schools promote Islam in the way that the TiZA school in Minnesota does. I was told that this was not the case in the schools these sources were familiar with. However, one particular school (and likely numerous others) appears to be in violation of state law because the school’s affidavit for its charter does not acknowledge that it is connected with a religious institution or group. In other words, those who chartered this school practiced taqiyya by hiding this fact. (Enterprising readers may want to research this with respect to FGC schools around the country. For a list of the FGC network in America and its schools, click here).

    What’s more, the schools appear to be a source of recruitment for outside school activities sponsored by the FGC, such as summer camps, which would be in keeping with the pattern of recruitment of members and followers that FGC employs worldwide, according to both the Jane’s and Middle East Quarterly articles.

    As a further example of the use of taqiyya, the Jane’s article gives examples of how FGC’s Turkish language media outlet Zaman runs stories with information and headlines that are missing from the English language media outlet Today’s Zaman. This practice of two different messages, one to the indigenous Islamic population and one to the West, is common in the Islamic world, and has led many in the West, including political leaders and academics, to be misled as to the true intentions of Islamists.

    In building a sophisticated and well-funded worldwide network, including a substantial presence here in the U.S., Fethullah Gulen is following in the footsteps and exhortations of Mohammed, who counseled patience and deception as a means of overcoming the infidel when the power of the infidel was greater than the power of the umma, the Muslim community. In a very real sense this is as or more sinister than the frontal assault strategy of Islamist organizations such as al Qaeda and Hamas, because, like the proverbial “frog in the kettle,” we are incrementally “boiled alive” without realizing it.

    For years American Congress for Truth, and now its “sister” organization ACT! for America, have been ringing the alarm bells about what is variously known as “cultural jihad,” “creeping jihad,” “stealth jihad,” and “creeping shariah.” Much of Europe and Great Britain has been Islamized through this process, a process that invariably does not lead to peaceful coexistence between Muslims and non-Muslims, but leads to Islamic self-segregation, increased Islamist militancy and aggression, and the eventual forced imposition of Islamic shariah law within the society.

    The FGC charter schools in America may outwardly appear innocuous, but they are serving a greater and long-range objective of Fethullah Gulen. We in the West need to be less gullible and more discerning when it comes to the elements of “stealth jihad” within our midst.

    Guy Rodgers is Executive Director of ACT! for America.

    0000000000000000000000000000000000000000

    American Congress for Truth
    P.O. Box 6884
    Virginia Beach, VA 23456
    [email protected]

    Every day, American Congress for Truth (ACT) a 501c3 non-profit organization is on the front lines fighting for you in meeting with politicians, decision makers, speaking on college campuses and planning events to educate and inform the public about the threat of Islamofascism
  • Israel must accept Palestinian state, Joe Biden says

    Israel must accept Palestinian state, Joe Biden says

    Vice-President Joe Biden placed America on a collision course with Israel on Tuesday, urging the new government to accept the goal of a Palestinian state and stop expanding Jewish settlements on occupied land.

    By Alex Spillius in Washington
    Last Updated: 11:16PM BST 05 May 2009

    U.S. Vice President Joe Biden at a media conference at NATO headquarters in Brussels Photo: AP

    Mr Biden used an address to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee – the leading pro-Israeli lobby group in the United States – to deliver a tough message to Benjamin Netanyahu, the country’s new prime minister.

    “Israel has to work for a two-state solution,” said Mr Biden. “You’re not going to like my saying this, but not build more settlements, dismantle existing outposts and allow Palestinians freedom of movement.”

    Mr Netanyahu, by contrast, has not accepted the principle of a Palestinian state and his government plans to build more homes inside existing Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. It has also refrained from removing any of the illegal settler outposts that Mr Biden mentioned. Meanwhile, hundreds of checkpoints scattered across the West Bank continue to restrict the freedom of movement of Palestinians.

    Mr Biden’s comments brought the differences between America and Israel into the open. They came ahead of Mr Netanyahu’s first official visit to Washington, expected later this month.

    The new prime minister, who leads a coalition government in which Right-wing parties have the most influence, told the AIPAC conference by satellite that he was ready to begin peace talks with the Palestinians “the sooner the better”. But Mr Netanyahu made no reference to the possibility of a Palestinian state.

    Instead, he outlined a “triple track” approach to peace, a strategy that emphasises political, economic and security schemes to resolve the conflict.

    On the economic track, Mr Netanyahu said Israel was prepared to remove as many obstacles as possible to advance the Palestinian economy.

    “I want to see Palestinian youngsters know that they have a future,” he said. “I want them not to be hostage to a cult of death, and despair and hate.”

    Privately, British officials predict that Mr Netanyahu will eventually accept the principle of Palestinian statehood, largely because of American pressure. But they believe he will hold out for a while in order to avoid being seen to give way easily.

    In his speech, Mr Biden was careful to call on the Palestinian Authority to “combat terror and incitement against Israel”. He stressed that the US would never abandon its commitment to Israel’s security. Mr Biden also sought to reassure Israel’s supporters that the administration’s conciliatory approach towards Iran was not open-ended and the goal of preventing the Islamic republic from acquiring nuclear weapons remained unchanged. “We are intensely focused on avoiding the grave danger … of a nuclear armed Iran,” said the Vice-President.

    Meanwhile, a United Nations inquiry was deeply critical of the Israeli army’s behaviour during the offensive in the Gaza Strip in January.

    It blamed Israeli forces for six of the nine incidents when UN buildings in Gaza were attacked, causing death and injuries to people sheltering inside.

    Source:  www.telegraph.co.uk, 05 May 2009

  • Letter to Madame Pelosi

    Letter to Madame Pelosi

    Letter addressed by a group of retired Turkish ambassadors to Madame Nancy Pelosi, Honorable Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America

    {{{isim}}}

    Doğum 26 Mart 1940
    Baltimore, ABD
    Görev süresi 4 Ocak 2007 –
    Partisi Demokratik P

    Once again, extremist factions within the American-Armenian communities have launched their yearly campaigns asking the US Congress the adoption of a resolution recognizing their claims of “Armenian Genocide”.

    We, a Group of Retired Turkish Ambassadors, whose friends and colleagues have been brutally murdered by Armenian terrorists, categorically object to such political initiatives based on false and untenable premises.

    The arguments set forth in the draft resolution are inaccurate, unfounded and are no more than tendentious assertions. If adopted, it will constitute a monumental symbol of one-sidedness, and an affront to the dignity of the Turkish people whose forefathers are accused of a detestable crime they had not committed. The silence of the draft Resolution on the losses and sufferings of the Turkish people during the same period is another regrettable aspect.

    The “FINDINGS” in Section 2 of the draft resolution calls for a detailed rebuttal which we are ready to provide in an appropriate setting in the Congress. Here we shall draw Your attention to a few points of overriding importance:

    – The “post-World War I Turkish Government” was not a government legimately representing its people, but merely a remnant of the Ottoman Government under the captivity of British troops. It had no authority beyond the city of Istanbul under occupation. The so-called “court martials” formed in 1919 by that government were no more than the tools of the occupation forces. Their judges, who had even refused to hear the witnesses of the defendants, were appointed by the political opponents of the “Young Turks”. Even the British lawyers considered these courts to be a “farce” and an offence to the credibility of the British and Ottoman Governments.

    – According to international law, the crime of genocide cannot be ascertained by parliamentary sub-committees or other political organs, but only by competent and impartial courts.

    – Documents in the US archives (derived mainly from missionaries who had relied on Armenian sources) have been dismissed by the British Attorney General in 1920 as “personal impressions and opinions” unsuitable for use in legal proceedings. At the time the British had the possibility of obtaining any document they wanted in Turkey.

    – US Ambassador Morghentau never visited Eastern Anatolia. When writing his “story”, he relied on the words of his two Armenian assistant-interpreters. His efforts to convince the United States to declare war against the Ottoman State was well known, as were his personal political ambitions. Most of the subsequent American ambassadors, including Admiral Bristol, as well as the American Observer Mission have contradicted his allegations. The reports of Captain Emory Niles and Mr. Arthur Sutherlands on the atrocities carried out by Armenian gangs and volunteers attached to occupation forces can be found in the American archives albeit in a mutilated form (U.S. 867.00/1005).

    – The three Ministers mentioned by name were tried in absentia not for the “massacre” of the Armenians, but for having dragged the State into World War I on the side of Germany. Two of them were subsequently assasinated by Armenian terrorists, as were 31 innocent Turkish diplomats who had not yet been born at the time of these events. All members of the Ottoman Parliament and high level officials detained by the British Government and deported to the Island of Malta were later released for “lack of evidence” of war crimes.

    – It has been clearly established that the presumed words of Hitler were the invention of a journalist, and were not recorded in any archive.

    – Personal merits or stance of Mr.Lemkin cannot change the internationally recognized fact that only a competent court can rule whether or not the crime of genocide has been committed..

    – Neither the United Nations, nor the Genocide Convention have ever recognized or made mention of “an Armenian Genocide”, as suggested in the draft resolution. The special UN Working Group refused to endorse the “Whitaker Report” containing this allegation on the gounds that it was not the Group’s task to pass judgement on history.

    – Statements such as the “first genocide of the 20th Century” are thoughtless assertions against the Turkish nation, are morally unjust and ethically wrong, given the facts of history. In the Balkans alone, the 19th and 20th centuries witnessed the death of millions of Turks and Muslims as a result of massacre, disease and hunger. Only a part of them succeeded to reach Turkey in a pitiful state. No missionary or relief organization helped them; their sufferings were not reported in the West, they remained as the forgotten sons and daughters of history.

    The collusion and cooperation of the elements of the Armenian population with the invading Russian, French and British forces, and the destruction and massacres they have committed against civilian populations is a fact attested to not only by official Ottoman records, but also by several American, British and Russian sources. Secretary of State R.Lansing is unequivocal when he reports to President Wilson: “The betrayal of the Armenians against the State is the cause of their relocation”. Official records set forth that an Armenian Delegation wanted to participate in the Peace Conference as “the representatives of the Armenians who were de facto participants in the war on the Allied side against the Ottoman State”. The memorandum they submitted on Febuary 28, 1919 to the Conference confirms their “betrayal”, alongside the extreme territorial claims advanced by them. As Secretary Lansing has admitted, the relocation of the Armenian population in Eastern Anatolia was prompted by real security concerns.

    It is acknowledged, however, that under the conditions of war, the relocation process could not be managed as it should have been. During the relocation, unwarranted deaths and suffering was witnessed mainly due to disease, bandits and tribal attacks (in particular of those who had found refuge in Anatolia after their expulsion from their homelands by Armenians); but this tragic destiny was shared also by Turks and other Muslim populations. More than 2.5 million of them perished in the same war; according to some estimates 518,000 Turks and some Jews were killed by Armenian para-military troops and gangs. It was these very organizations that had spearheaded the uprisings, fought against the Ottoman armies, massacred hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. and destroyed entire settlements and communities. Their objective was to prepare ethnically clean territories for a future Armenian state in areas where they never held a majority There is extensive documentation that these groups were armed and organized by Russia and France, and received financial help from missionary organizations.

    It is common knowledge that relocation of populations during wars and national emergencies is not a measure that has been resorted to solely by the Ottoman State. The exchange of Greek and Turkish populations (as seen fit, inter alia, by Winston Churchill) was agreed to at the Lausanne Peace Conference. During the Second World War, as a precautionary measure, the United States had interned 300,000 of its own citizens of Japanese origin for several years under dire conditions for fear of their collaboration with an enemy thousand of kilometers away in another corner of the globe. US Courts later recognized this measure as legitimate. At the end of this war, six million German inhabitants of Central Europe were deported to Germany by a decision taken at the Potsdam and Yalta conferences. The insufficient organization, logistics and in particular poor protection provided by the victorious Allied armies were the main causes of the death of at least 1,000,000 Germans. If the Ottoman armies fighting on five fronts could not provide sufficient protection to relocated groups, or could not prevent losses caused by natural causes and diseases, this was not due to an intent to destroy these groups but resulted from the insufficiency of their means and resources under war conditions.

    In fact, immediately after the War, Allied Governments were unable to put forth a single genuine document proving the Ottoman Government’s intent to annihilate their Armenian subjects. However, there is abundant documentation to the contrary. The Ottoman Ministry of Interior had given strict instructions for the protection of these people, monitored their progress, warned or punished those officials who had failed their duties and diverted considerable sums for logistics from the war budget. We are not aware of another example of a government that permitted its subjects to receive foreign humanitarian assistance while acting at the same time with the intent of killing them. By permitting the continuation of the activities of the American missionaries and the distribution of relief material to relocated Armenians without hindrance, both the Ottoman and Nationalist governments had showed that they did not harbour such intent. Besides clearly attesting to this fact, report No.192 of the “Near East Relief” approved by the joint session of the Senate’ House of Representatives on 22 May 1922, provides invaluable information regarding the numbers of those assisted (obviously alive) and the emigration movements, thus confuting the exaggerated numbers presented as corresponding to the victims of the relocation.

    How could this be designated as genocide if the State took all measures possible under the conditions of war to ensure the protection of the relocated population?

    The malicious exaggeration that 1,500,000 Armenians died has no basis in fact. According to Ottoman census figures, the total Armenian population at that time in Turkey was 1,294,000. It is estimated that about 900,000 of them living in Eastern Anatolia were to be subjected to relocation; meaning their transfer and resettlement within the territory of the same state. Ottoman documents also show that 220,000 of the relocated subjects later returned to their homes. Even if credit is given to American documents only, the report of the American Consul in Aleppo informing his government of the safe arrival and resettlement of 500,000 Armenians in his consular area appears to challenge these exaggerated figures, which presume a death toll higher than the total Armenian population of Anatolia. The registers of several Western Governments recorded large numbers of Armenian immigrants and refugees. Russian records and report No.192 of the “Near East Relief” show that no less than 350,000 Armenians followed the retreating Russian forces or preferred to emigrate instead of returning to their homes at the end of the War. The 132000 children mentioned in the draft resolution as being adopted by American families should be added to these figures. A simple calculation made by demographers is sufficient to prove the unrealistic exaggeration of these figures: If the present global Armenian population is accepted as the descendants of the purportedly such a limited number of Armenians to have survived the relocation, this would mean a population explosion unheard in the history of mankind. By the same rate of growth, the present day population of Turkey would have reached three hundred million, almost equal to the population of the United States, instead of the present 72 million.

    Prominent scholars (Turkish, American or others), refute these exaggerations as the remnants of war propaganda (as later acknowledged by British historian Arnold Toynbee) or as the products of ethnic and religious bias. The same bias also explains the lack of any reference to Turkish-Muslim deaths.

    Of course, the number of casualties is important. However, in order to qualify such unfortunate events as “genocide”, it is not the numbers, but credible, documented proof about the existence of the intent to destroy a people as such that needs to be established. At the end of the same war, Allied governments who were in possession of all official records and archives could not produce any credible document or evidence proving this element of intent. They consequently released all the ministers and parliamentarians who were detained or interned in Malta for prosecution of war crimes.

    As the Republican generations of our nation, we may not relish delving into the sad pages of our history. However, this does not mean that we are not prepared to face the truth. We acknowledge also the human suffering in the histories of other nations including those of the colonial period . We object, however, to the misuse of these events for revanchisme and narrow political or other interests. In our country, speaking for or against a version of the events of 1915 is not prohibited by law in contrast to the practices of some other countries. The Turkish Government has formally proposed the formation of a commission composed of Turkish and Armenian scholars and the opening for their examination of all state archives, including the archives of the Armenian organizations that had spearheaded the uprisings. The refusal so far to accept joint and impartial research is the irrefutable evidence of the lack of good-will behind the genocide accusations. We have therefore to conclude that not us, but those who refuse objective research, are afraid of facing the truths of their own history. We will wait patiently for a positive answer, because it is only through dialogue that reconciliation can ever be attained between the Turkish and Armenian nations.

    We hope that the Honorable members of the Congress will recognize the risks of the formalization by legislative fiat of such contested allegations by political decisions, parliamentary or otherwise. To attempt to codify history in a political context is bound to have serious implications well beyond the subject matter of that Resolution. “Genocide” is a legal concept defined in the 1948 UN Convention and only a due and impartial legal process carried out by a competent court can certify its existence and issue an indictment to this effect. We would expect that the Congress of the United States, itself an edifice of law, to refrain from acting as a self-appointed tribunal.

    We believe that the final objective of any survey of the events of the late 19th and early 20th centuries should be to promote peace and mutual understanding between the Turks and Armenians. These two peoples lived together for almost ten centuries in friendship and cordiality. We should therefore ask : What other interests are served besides the self-serving interests of the “Armenian Genocide” industry, were the Congress to adopt such a resolution? Will it help the on-going delicate process of normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia or the resolution of the the issue in contention? Will it serve the interests of Armenia, or of the United States? And finally, what impact it would have on Turkish-American relations which are no less important today than they were in the past?

    Some in the Republic of Armenia or elsewhere may consider such allegations as politically useful, even a convenient cover for the occupation of a fifth of the territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the displacement of more than one million people from their homes. Even recent history shows that such illusions can only serve to fuel feelings of injustice and pave the way to enmities and new conflicts. Victimized and offended peoples would legitimately consider any cooperation with the aggressors and offenders as immoral. The feelings of the Turkish people, which consider Azerbaijan as a sister nation, cannot be much different.

    Turkey was among the first to recognize (for the second time in modern history) the independence of Armenia, lending a helping hand for the development of relations based on legally binding bilateral and multilateral treaties. The responsibility of the present unsatisfactory state of relations falls upon the extremists supported by Diaspora organizations which do not seem to care about the indefinite postponement of the normalisation of relations between Turkey and Armenia. These elements prevent the Armenian State from following the path of reason, moderation and reconciliation.. No reasonable observer can overlook the benefits which a land-locked Armenia with scarce natural resources, reduced to the position of a forward military base of the Russian Federation stands to gain from regional cooperation in the Caucasus. The harm done to the true interests of the Armenian people struggling with poverty is obvious.

    The Honorable members of Congress should therefore take into consideration that the adoption of this Resolution will undoubtedly pose new barriers to the Turkish and Armenian governments in their search for common understanding and solutions concerning these issues.

    The adoption of this draft resolution will inevitably create serious complications affecting Turkish-American relations as well. How one can imagine that the Turkish people could overlook the injustice done by the highest political authority of its long-time ally if the Congress fails to take the slightest trouble to consider arguments other than those raised by ethnic Armenian activists? For some governments and political bodies to act under the impulse of local political interests may be attractive; however, we believe such motives should not overshadow their even more important responsibility in regards to international moral, legal, strategic and political implications of their actions. With regard to the extreme Armenian claims, the Turkish people will assess the actions and policies of our friends and foes on the basis of what stand they take on our views and arguments.. Provoking sentiments of injustice and discrimination can only benefit the radical ideologies

    It is unthinkable that the Turkish people tolerate and forget about the injustice done, if the US Congress adopts this draft Resolution. That is bound to have a serious debilitating effect on Turkish-American relations which can reach the desirable level only with the support of the peoples. The many possibilities of cooperation between Turkey and the USA in the Middle East, the Caucasus, the Balkans, in Afghanistan,Iraq, in the field of energy, in the joint struggle against terrorism and other transnational challenges are likely to suffer as a result. The goodwill already generated by the planned visit of President Barrack Obama to Turkey may be lost.

    We certainly would not relish the happening of such negative developments in the relations of the two allies who had fought against common foes side by side in the distant corners of the globe. What we are asking now from the Honorable members of the US Congress is to be fair and refuse to adopt this draft resolution based on the distortion of history and on an ideology of hatred and revanchism. It is only through justice, fairness and truth that Turkish-American friendship and cooperation can endure and the real interests of the Armenian nation can be served.

    Ali Hikmet Alp
    ahalpi @ gmail.com

  • Kurdish Jewish History Arrives In Baltimore

    Kurdish Jewish History Arrives In Baltimore

    Kurdish-Jewish history preserved by author and son of an immigrant.

    Rochelle Eisenberg
    Staff Writer

    ariel-sabar

    When Ariel Sabar was growing up in Los Angeles, he was embarrassed by the exotic ways of his immigrant Kurdish-Jewish father, Dr. Yona Sabar. Dr. Sabar, a professor of Aramaic at the University of California-Los Angeles, was born and raised in the remote northern Iraqi village of Zakho.

    Years later, Mr. Sabar decided to travel to Zakho with his father. The result is “My Father’s Paradise: A Son’s Search For His Jewish Past In Kurdish Iraq” (Algonquin Books), winner of the 2008 National Book Critics Circle Award for autobiography.

    Next Thursday, May 7, at 7 p.m., Mr. Sabar will speak at the Center for Jewish Education, at 5750 Park Heights Ave., about his book as part of CJE’s “On The Same Page” initiative. The program was piloted two years to bring together Jewish adults to discuss books with Jewish themes.

    The BALTIMORE JEWISH TIMES spoke recently with Mr. Sabar. He worked as a journalist for 15 years, including three years as an investigative reporter at the Baltimore Sun.

    Why did you write the book?

    I was the consummate 1980s L.A. boy. I bought into the L.A. mythology. I boogie-boarded, bought my clothing at a surf shop. As I saw it through a boy’s eyes, my dad didn’t fit in. He didn’t know how to dress, he cut his own hair. I kept him at arm’s length

    The turning point in my life was the birth of my own son, Seth, in 2002. When you have your own kid, it changes your perspective of your relationship with your parents. I felt I was unfair to my own father.

    I also was drawn to the story about a forgotten-but-ancient group of Jews who were part of the oldest community of the Diaspora.

    What was your biggest surprise in Zakho?

    I heard that in Kurdistan (sic), the Jews and Muslims got along. I always was skeptical.

    People knew immediately we were Jews. The first thing the hosts said was, “Welcome to your home.” They invited us to drink tea and eat elaborate meals. There were still fond memories of Jewish life.

    Saddam Hussein tried to rename the Jewish quarter “the Liberated Quarter.” He didn’t want a trace. [After Saddam’s overthrow], my dad’s hometown went back to calling it “the Jewish Quarter.”

    What do you see as disheartening today between Jews and Muslims?

    People look at Iraq and read the headlines. There is this assumption that this was always the way, that they hated each other all the time. The story of the Kurdish Jews and the Jews in Iraq was that when the Israelites were exiled, they formed a pretty good pluralistic society. There were problems, but nothing of the scale of what was seen in Europe.

    What can American Jews learn from the history of the Kurdish Jews?

    What we can take away is the value of reaffirming our ties to our families’ histories. One of the themes of the book is that in the face of so much change, what can we hold on to? Make an effort to talk to grandparents, write down or video their stories and discus what it is about the past you want to preserve.

    Any stories from people you met on your book tours?

    Once or twice, a father of Mideastern background, in one case an Iraqi and in one case even a Kurdish Jew, said to me, “Now I have something to pass on to my child.”

    One son said, “I had no idea I had this history. I didn’t realize we had a rich past.”

    What also came out of the book tour were documents and memoirs that were given to me. I’ve became a repository of Kurdish Jews. I hope to maintain the e-mails and documents that people sent to me.

    What’s your next project?

    It was inspired by the story of how my parents met. My father was in his first year in New York and thinking of going back to Israel. America was not what it seemed. He sees a woman entering Washington Square park, taking photos of people who didn’t succeed in America. It reminded him of the Kurds in Israel. He talked to her and they got married four months later.

    I want to find other stories of people with strikingly different backgrounds, who happen to meet by chance in New York iconic public places.

    Anything else?

    A big Iraqi magazine wrote a four-page spread on the book. I have made friends on Facebook with Kurds in Turkey. An Arab radio station did a piece. The book is being translated into Hebrew, to be published later this year or early next year, and the Dutch have bought the rights to the book. You see the way the book is being received by all three faiths. It’s an affirmation.

    Source:  www.jewishtimes.com, May 1, 2009

  • A MOVING TRIBUTE IN THE U.S. CONGRESS TO A TURKISH-AMERICAN: ALI CAYIR

    A MOVING TRIBUTE IN THE U.S. CONGRESS TO A TURKISH-AMERICAN: ALI CAYIR
    Thursday, 30 April 2009
    ergun_s[ Ergun KIRLIKOVALI’s note: The following message was read into the Congressional records by Congressman Joe Baca, D, [CA-43] on April 22, 2009, honoring Mr. Ali Cayir. It is a huge honor and I, on behalf of tens of thousands of Turkish-Americans Southern California, congratulate my good friend Ali Cayir for this unique achievement. I believe such success helps break the bias against the Turkish-Americans and bigotry on issues related to Turkey. ]# # #

    ALLEN CAYIR, ELLIS ISLAND MEDAL OF HONOR — (Extensions of Remarks – April 22, 2009) SPEECH OF

    HON. JOE BACA

    OF CALIFORNIA

    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

    WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22, 2009

    Mr. BACCA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Allen Cayir, President of Transech Engineers, Inc., who will receive the prestigious Ellis Island Medal of Honor.

    Established in 1986 by the National Ethnic Coalition of Organizations, the Ellis Island Medal of Honor pays tribute to our nation’s immigrant heritage by recognizing those individuals whose achievements have helped to foster respect and understanding for America’s ethnic diversity. Since the award began, recipients have included United States Senators, Congressman, Nobel Laureates, military leaders, outstanding athletes, and clergy.

    A native of Turkey, Mr. Cayir, or ”Ali” as he is known to his friends, arrived in the United States after earning an engineering degree from Istanbul Technical University. In 1989, he founded Transtech Engineers, Inc, which provides professional and technical expertise to governmental agencies, educational institutions and the private development sector.

    Through his dedication and hard work, he was able to grow the business to a multi-million dollar enterprise. Notable projects over the years have included the Alhambra Civic Center Public Library and the Renovation of the Historic Santa Fe Depot Train Station in San Bernardino, California. In addition to his professional accomplishments, Ali is also known for his philanthropic contributions. He has participated in fundraising activities for the Tools for Education organization at California State University San Bernardino, as well as helped with the restoration work at Mission San Juan Capistrano. In 2005, Ali started a matching fund drive for local businesses for Hurricane Katrina victims, and personally matched other funds collected.

    Ali is a volunteer teacher at California State University, where he sits on the board of the College of Education and the Tools for Education Project. He was instrumental in raising $3 million for a new education building at the University.

    He is also very active in the Southern California Hispanic community, engaging in many community organizations that provide support services to the Latino population. In 2006, the Embracing Latino Leadership Alliance honored Ali with the ”Honorary Latino Citizen” award.

    Finally, Ali is a founding Board Member of American Friends of Israel and Turkey, an organization dedicated to improve cooperation and understanding between American, Turkish, and Israeli citizens by supporting cultural, ethnic, and community events.

    Throughout his extraordinary career as an engineer and community servant, Ali has always remained a dedicated family man. For the past 31 years, he has been married to his wife Sybil. Together, they have a daughter, who is currently following in her father’s footsteps, pursuing a degree in civil engineering.

    On behalf of myself, my wife, and my family, I congratulate Mr. Cayir for this tremendous honor. His contributions to his family and his community provide a wonderful example of service for all Americans to follow.

    END
  • Bryza on Armenia, Turkey and Azerbaijan

    Bryza on Armenia, Turkey and Azerbaijan

     

     
     

    [ 02 May 2009 12:35 ]
    “We have a fair and balanced proposal on the table”

    Washington. Zaur Hasanov – APA. Adviser to US Secretary of State on European and Euarsian Affairs, OSCE Minsk Group US Co-Chair Matthew Bryza’s interview to APA.

    – In the first days of the next week, the MFA of Azerbaijan and Armenia will be in Washington. Is it coincidence or you are setting up a meeting with the ministers?

    – Of course, it is not a coincidence. Secretary of State Clinton as well as the President have both said they want to help bring about significant breakthrough in Naqorno-Karabakh peace process. So we have both foreign ministers here having separate meetings with our Secretary of State and we, the Co-Chairs are preparing for the meetings of the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia on May 7 in Prague.

    – Many think thanks in Washington are raising a concern about the Turkish-Russian rapprochement. They think that Russia helps Turks to find a deal with Armenia but instead may ask Turks to halt any future energy pipeline projects which are planned to bypass Russia. Do you have the same concern?

    – The experts have a right to tell their opinions. As a person who is responsible for our foreign policy toward this region, I can say that Turkey is a key ally and one of our closest friends in the world and is reliable. Turkey should have decent, normal relations with Russia. And we all know that for years there have been very deep business relationships between Turkey and Russia. For example, projects like Blue Stream which aimed to strengthen Russia’s monopoly over gas transit to Europe. But Turkey has been a very active and reliable partner and helped Europe to diversify its energy supplies, both oil and gas, through pipelines linked primarily to Azerbaijan, but also, perhaps, eventually to Turkmenistan and Iraq. So whatever Russia’s ambitions may be, the U.S.-Turkey strategic partnership is strong and will stay strong. Finally, when it comes to Nagorno-Karabakh, all of the Minsk Group Co-Chair countries are one team and are working together to deliver a breakthrough. Russia will no be able to do it alone. In fact, none of the Co-Chair countries will be able to do it alone; we all have to work together.

    – Is there any remark about the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in the roadmap announced between Turkey and Armenia recently?

    – I am not going to comment on the content of the bilateral agreement between two countries. But what I can say is that there are two processes: Nagorno-Karabakh, or Azerbaijani-Armenian relations, and a separate one for Turkey-Armenian relations. They are two separate processes. In fact, we anticipate they both will move forward simultaneously but at different speeds. We may have more progress on one at one time, and it may slow down at another time. They are separate processes moving forward in parallel, but at different speeds. So I would anticipate that the roadmap focuses on Turkey-Armenian relations. But the last point I am making is that the diplomatic and psychological climate in the region will improve due to Turkey-Armenian normalization. And this will also improve the climate for the Nagorno-Karabakh process.

    – Are you confident that the border opening will change the climate and help foster the negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan?

    – In diplomacy there is no guarantee except on international legal issues when there are legal guarantees. What we have is a strong opinion by the U.S. in this case, if Turkey-Armenian normalization moves forward, by the way I am not talking about the opening of border, border opening will happen later in the normalization process, but as this normalization process between Turkey and Armenia begins and goes forward, we believe we will see that the prospect for a solution to Nagorny Karabakh conflict will improve. But you don’t have to trust me now. All we can ask is to give us Co-Chairs some times, several months, to work with the parties to achieve a breakthrough. And if we reach the breakthrough maybe next week in Prague or later on in Saint Petersburg, you will know that we are right. Then, every side will be able to move forward together in confidence. If we don’t achieve a breakthrough, if we are wrong, then we know that Azerbaijan will react. So, our job is to focus all our efforts on achieving the breakthrough so everything can move forward smoothly.

    – Do you have any document on table which presidents can sign and reach the breakthrough in Prague?

    – I don’t want to suggest that any document may be signed at that particular meeting. The breakthrough, I am hoping for, does not necessarily require the signing of any documents. We need presidents to agree on a few remaining concepts of our Basic Principals, which will constitute the breakthrough. I don’t think that there is any need to anticipate any document to be signed at this point. The breakthrough, when negotiating the peace agreement, can come in all kind of forms. You can’t get anything on paper unless you worked it out intellectually. The Madrid documents are the last version of the Basic Principals is proposed by the Co-Chairs and they reflect several years of negotiations. From our perspective, our suggestions, in the form of Madrid Documents, remain on the table. We have been working with the presidents and foreign ministers to improve that document and its recommendations, and bring sides closer together. The foundation of our work is the Madrid Document.

    – Ho do you charcaterize the US-Azerbaijan relations?

    – The relationship between Azerbaijan and the USA is a friendship and strategic partnership, and we want to deepen it. We’ve got a whole range of areas where we need to work. Our strategic partnership has been based on security, energy, (where Azerbaijan is one of the important countries anywhere in helping Europe to diversify it supplies of natural gas and oil. Of course, the expansion of the political and economic freedom within Azerbaijan is also important. All those issues are of great importance and are interrelated, and we need to see progress in all three areas at the same time. Right now we are making a major push at the highest level to help to Azerbaijan to address the most important problem, which is the settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. We have a fair and balanced proposal on the table, which, when implemented will led to return of territories, to return of IDP’s and refugees, and which will bring a sense of security to Armenian and other residents of NK and surrounding territories, and will have a positive impact on stimulating economic growth and prosperity, and lay a foundation for long-term peace.