Tag: Nagorno-Karabakh

  • CBS – BY DR. ROBERT B. MCKAY (TURK BOB)

    CBS – BY DR. ROBERT B. MCKAY (TURK BOB)

    From: ALI CINAR
    Subject: BOB MCKAYDEN CBS YORUMU

    bob1

    To Les Moonves, President & CEO, CBS Corp.  lmoonves@cbs.com

    From: Robert McKay, PhD., P. O. Box 126, Eastford, CT 06242 860-974-0392

    Regarding:  Reply to the Bob Simon/Peter Balakian Story titled “Battle over History”

    Date:  February 28, 2010

    Bob Simon’s story being aired Sunday, February 28, 2010, on 60 Minutes with Peter Balakian is causing concerns about CBS by the Turkish community…concerns that I, too, share.

    50 Years ago my wife and I traveled to Turkey.  We lived there for 5 years as teachers at the Tarsus American College, Tarsus, Turkey.  Finding artifacts going back to 2500 B.C. opened our eyes to aspects of history that never seemed real in a sterile classroom on the rolling hills of eastern Connecticut, University of Connecticut.

    One of the many issues that interested me were the events of 1915 and the actions that surrounded them.

    However if we take 1915 out of context we do not see the relentless, persistent and predictable deaths that the Armenians have inflicted on their neighbors:  Jews, Kurds, Turks, Azeries, and all others who might disagree with them.

    A flow of history which shows a uniform and consistent pattern of atrocities by the Armenians would be the 3 periods listed:

    1.      1915 through WWI Armenian Russian conspiracy

    2.      1980’s Armenians begin worldwide assassinations:  Ambassadors and politicians

    they didn’t like.  The FBI credited Armenia with 25% of international terrorism in the USA.

    3.      1992—In the Nagorno=Karabakh region of Azerbaijan Armenian and Russian

    forces kill 400,000 Azaries leaving 1,000,000 (IDP’s) International Displaced

    Persons in Azerbaijan.

    Period I

    Let’s talk about 1915 through WWI.  It is well documented that Russia wished the demise of Ottoman Turkey and wanted access to oceans.  During this period Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire flocked to join Russian forces attacking the Ottomans from their eastern flank.  The Armenian Russian forces and guerilla forces with the Ottoman Empire blow up post offices, cut lines of communication and caused the Ottomans to move up to 400,000 troops from the southern flank to protect the Armenian Russian threat.  There were massacres and atrocities of equal magnitude on both sides.  Bones found in Turkish soil are both ethnically Turkic and Armenian.  However, today after all these years people like Peter Balakian, who never had first hand knowledge of the situation, claim that the Ottoman’s committed a genocide:  as a side note the term genocide was never used until it had political importance long after WWII.

    In brief your concern with the topic is appreciated, but telling only the pro-western/Christian side of the story is not appreciated.  In the minds of many scholars, writers and politicians, the Armenian perspective is wrong!  There are, in fact, two sides.

    Please note that a preponderance of scholars and politicians do not accept the genocide concept.  Interestingly the highest ranking Armenian, Hovhannes Katchaznouni, the first Prime Minister of the new independent Armenian Republic in 1923 did not accept the concept of genocide.

    a)      Dr. Katchaznouni in his report to the Dashnaq Party’s 1923 Congress clearly accepts Armenian responsibility for the tragedy that befell his country.  “We (Armenians) caused this tragedy.  Turks knew what they were doing (and) the (Ottoman Turkish) deportation (of Armenians) was right and necessary”

    This report has been hidden from researchers for years, however since being uncovered it has been published in a brief 125 page book titled “Dashnagtzoutiun Has Nothing to Do Anymore”, Kaynak Yayinlari (Kaynak Press)  pps. 125.

    b) The Malta Tribunal, held by England, immediately after WWI and initiated by the Armenian interest could not convict a single Ottoman military officer or politician of

    genocide and/or war crimes.

    c) U.S. Admiral Bristol, commander of the Sixth Fleet and later first Ambassador to the new Republic of Turkey (post WWI) traveled the country extensively and reported no genocide.

    d) Ambassador Elekdar went to England to intensively study a document produced by the English called the “Blue Book”.  The Ambassador has shown that most of the the documents were either fraudulently written or slanted so as to draw England into WWI.

    Ambassador Elekdar subjected himself to scholars from around the world on his findings. He has not been refuted.

    For brevity it is fair to say that the key scholars and leaders of the early 1900’s did not attribute a genocide to the Ottoman Turks.

    Period II

    During the 1980’s Armenians, who never at any time in the history of the Ottoman Empire had never had sovereignty over even a single square inch of the Anatolian peninsula were beginning to push for land claims and reparation based upon a made up genocide claim.

    During this time the Turkish archives were open to scholars.  No one has ever found a single note or sentence regarding a government policy of eliminating or getting rid of Armenians.

    Armenia would never open its archives.  In order to prevent conflicting view the Armenians began a worldwide campaign of assassinating ambassadors and others who disagreed with them.  In fact at one point during this period the FBI identified Armenia as being responsible for 25% of international terror casualties in the U.S.A.

    Period III

    In 1992 interest in oil drive an Armenian Russian genocide of Azeris.  As in Period I (1915) Armenians are pawns of Russia.

    However since the early 1800’s those people of the Transcaucuses:  Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan have been under the control of Russia.  The Armenians more that the others, have been willing to be the pawns of Russian geo-political interests.

    In the 1990’s Russia had decided that the oil rich region of Nagorno-Karabakh would be an autonomous section of Azerbaijan even though it had a high % of Armenians living there.

    The Armenians living in this Nagorno Karabkh region of Azerbaijan began killing any Azari that lived there.  In the village of Khojaly (about 7000 people) the Armenians killed every man, woman and child.  The Russian 366th Regiment participated.

    The result was that by 1992 Armenians were responsible for killing 400,000 people and leaving over 1,000,000 International Displaced Persons (IDP’s) in Azerbaijan.  Where is the popular media outrage?  Where is the political outrage?  These events are contemporary.

    As background information let’s remember that Armenia today is about the same population as Connecticut, slightly over 3 million.  Ten years ago the Armenian population was almost double that of today.  For economic reasons, Armenians are relocating around the world, a large percentage to Turkey.

    In Conclusion

    1. The long term actions of Armenia as an aggressor pawn of Russia lends credibility to the Turkish claims that there was no genocide.
    1. There is no doubt that more ethnic Turks died than ethnic Armenians,

    (International Red Cross figures state that more than 25% of all ethnic Turks died

    as a result of war, massacres, diseases and starvation.)

    1. There never was an Ottoman policy to exterminate Armenians.
    1. Ottoman Turks failed in World War I in large part because Armenian/Russian

    forces diverted their capabilities to the eastern part of the empire.

    1. At the beginning of the century Armenians were pawns of Russian attempts to

    gain seaports.  Armenia thought part of the Ottoman Empire would be given to

    them.

    1. Later in the century (1992) Armenia was a pawn of Russian oil interests.

    Again Russia gets oil, Armenia expands its borders into Azerbaijan.

    1. Armenian Russian killings in Azerbaijan are 400,000 dead and 1,000,000 IDP’s.

    Where is the outrage by the media and U.S. politicians.

    Personally I was very unhappy to see any program with Peter Balakian associated with it.  He is an Armenian nationalist who, as a “historian” has never attempted to see the truth of both sides.

    I could bring a wide range of resources to CBS that would acknowledge the suffering of Armenians and Turks and would like to do so if CBS has any interest in a broader look at history.

    Your 60 Minute piece either by plan or coincidence came at a very bad time:  the U.S. Congress is considering H. Res. 252 which agrees with the “non historical based claims of Armenia.”

    This resolution will harm U. S. Turkish relations and the Armenian-Turkish normalization process for years to come.  It will also harm Islam Christian trust for centuries around the world.  Alliances between Muslim and Christian countries will be less likely.  Certainly Turkish treaties with American backed Israel will be much

    less enthusiastically viewed.

    Cordially,

    Robert McKay

  • CBS 60 MINUTES TAKES SIDE IN “BATTLE OVER HISTORY”

    CBS 60 MINUTES TAKES SIDE IN “BATTLE OVER HISTORY”

    Watch video and post comments:

    Read article and post comments:

    ***

    It is with utmost disappointment and grave sadness that Americans of Turkish heritage coast-to-coast watched CBS’s 60 Minutes program on 28 February 2010 blatantly take side on the documentary “Battle Over History”. Instead of being impartial, objective, and balanced reporters, as expected from an international news media organization, CBS chose to act like an arrogant journalist with a cause, promoting a long discredited political claim of a spurious genocide as settled history.

    Selection of obviously biased contents, clearly provocative symbols, incredibly misrepresented location, dishonest and racist Armenian speakers, and overtly partisan narratives pointed to a propaganda campaign rather than an honest attempt to educate public about a historical controversy.

    The documentary start with a falsehood purporting “…overwhelming majority of historians recognize genocide…” whereas the opposite is true. Here is a partial list of 69 world renown historians who rejected publicly on 19 May 1985, in New York Times & Washington Post, the Armenian characterization of WWI events as genocide, instead called it “…inter communal warfare fought by Christian and Muslim irregulars…”: Prof. Bernard Lewis of Princeton, Prof. Stanford Shaw of UCLA, Prof. Justin McCarthy of Louisville, and many others.

    In fact, so many of the true scholars were refuting the Armenian claims that the Armenian lobby was forced to create new avenues to buy credibility: genocide scholars. These are mostly retired professionals, psychiatrists, lecturers on US Government, English teachers, and others, all posing as authorities in history but most are not even historians, and all organized through the Armenian lobby, financed in part by the Cafesjian Foundation and organized by the notoriously anti-Turkish Zoryan Institute.

    It was remarkable that an English professor, Balakian, and not a historian was selected as the spokesperson for Armenians in a complex event in history, along with a dentist, a priest, and others. The token inclusion of the harshly edited words of the frequently interrupted Turkish ambassador did little to counter the massive infusion of disinformation and deception by the Armenian propagandists featured prominently throughout the documentary.

    Balakian asserted “…450,000 Armenians died in Dar El Zor…” which was another falsehood. Even American consul wrote that 500,000 Armenians survived the move within the context of the temporary resettlement (TERESET) order of 1915. TERESET was a wartime homeland security measure taken to defend the country in the face of brutal foreign invasions (i.e. military campaigns by the ANZAC and the French in the Dardanelles, Russians in the Ottoman-Russian border, and British in Sinai, among others) and equally atrocious domestic revolts and fifth columns (i.e. Van Revolt by Armenians in April 1915).

    Even the U.S. Congress’ own records from those times and dates clearly corroborate the Turkish position on the conflict:

    a- “American Military Mission to Armenia” (General Harbord) Report 1920 and the Annex Report Nat. Archives 184.021/175 –which does not mention any “race extermination” but, on the contrary, refers to “…refinements of cruelty by Armenians to Muslims…”

    b- Joint U.S. CONGRESS RESOLUTION NO. 192, APRIL 22, 1922 relative to the activities of Near East Relief ending 31 December 1921 which has unanimously resolved that a total of 1,414,000 Armenians were alive (which makes killing of 1.5 million Armenians an impossibility, since the total Armenian population was around 1.5 million at the time.)

    c- George Montgomery, a member of the U.S. delegation at the Paris Conference, had presented a detailed tabulation in 1919, showing a total of 1,104,000 Armenians alive, apart from those who had already immigrated to other countries.

    d- 29 March 1919 report of the Paris Conference subcommittee on atrocities, chaired by the U.S. secretary of State Lansing, lists Armenian losses as “…more than 200,000…” Even this number is exaggerated as they got their information from the Armenian church, not exactly an impartial source. After meticulous research through the archives, the Turkish Historical Society documented the deaths of 54,000 Armenians using Ottoman police reports filed on site, of which number only about 8,400 are reported as victims of massacres. The paragraphs a, b, and c jointly point to the THS number being closer to reality.

    Who, then may have jacked this number of Armenian casualties from the original 54,000 first to 200,000 in 29 March 1919 (Paris Peace Conference;) 600,000 in May 1919 (in a poster created by Armenians soliciting money in U.S. churches;) to the current 1.5 million? Take a guess!

    Many of the re-located Armenians did arrive in Syria and all of them were given homes, land and money. Armenians were given an option to return to Turkey in 1916 and 1917, and many actually did, in fact, some even joined the French forces and fought against the Ottoman Empire. The descendants of the re-located Armenians who chose to live in Syria and Lebanon make up a large portion of the Diaspora Armenians today. These facts, unfortunately, were not mentioned in the presentation.

    A single site was shown along the Euphrates, claiming that the bones were everywhere, which is extremely questionable after 95 years. The Armenian propagandists featured in the documentary certainly are not known to be below placing those bones there just before the “show” for maximum impact on the story, in the finest tradition of Andonian, the master fabricator of fake Talaat telegrams fame.

    The Turkish Ambassador Nabi Sensoy was not given an opportunity to tell the truth, as he appeared for less than a minute, and erroneously referred to the re-settlement as deportations.

    Many American researchers and scholars, all experts in the history of the Ottoman Empire, dispute Armenian allegations, leading to the conclusion that although Armenian civilian losses during World War I were tragic, the events of 1915 were not tantamount to genocide. Armenians did not suffer alone, millions of Turks, Azeris, Kurds, Jews, Circassians, Persians also lost their lives during the same period from similar causes, including massacres by Armenian rebel bands. Take a look at the photos of Armenian revolutionaries, armed-to-the-teeth, here: www.ethocide.com . Do they look like the “poor, starving, unarmed, helpless Armenians” myth promoted deceptively and incessantly?

    The mound said to contain Armenian bones sounds very much like that Vereshagin painting of skulls of 1871, hanging in a museum in Moscow, with which the Armenians duped the world into thinking that those were the skulls of Armenians killed by Turks. When the Armenian lies were finally exposed by Prof. Turkkaya Ataov in 1983, no apology was issued by the Armenian lobbies. Same thing with alleged Hitler quote: it is a hoax. Even the most cursory search in the internet will readily reveal many sources showing Princeton historian Heath Lowry’s extensive work exposing the Armenian falsifications.

    That the frequently used infamous Hitler quote is a hoax is beyond suspicion. It suffices to read a few lines from the article “Historian of Armenian Descent Says Frequently Used Hitler Quote Is Nothing But a Forgery”, that appeared in The Armenian Reporter Vol. XVII, NO. 40, on August 2, 1984, where an Armenian historian advises his fellow Armenians not to use this fake quote again. “…Dr. Robert John, a historian of Armenian heritage from New York City stated, according the news article, that a commonly used quotation of an alleged statement by Adolf Hitler about the Armenian massacres was a forgery and should, therefore, not be used…” The complete article available at :

    Many other such fabrications, meticulously documented in recent a book by Ataov, are the reasons why we would be careful, if we were CBS reporters, not to take any Armenian claims, let alone who lies in the alleged mass grave, at face value.

    Armenians were never called infidels by the Ottomans as claimed in the film. On the contrary, it is a matter of historical record that the Ottomans had established one of the most tolerant administrations in history, with its millet system where the faith-based groups were organized in self-ruling, autonomous “millets”. When the Jews of Iberia were persecuted during the 1492 Spanish inquisitions and were told to convert to Catholicism, or leave, or get killed, no country in Europe would offer sanctuary to Jews for fear of retaliation by Catholic Rome. No country, except the Ottoman Empire, that is. Since than many other persecuted peoples have freely come to the Ottoman lands and prospered there in the centuries since. Turkey continued this fine tradition when German Jews in 1930, secular Iranians in 1980s, Iraqi Kurds in 1990s, and many others have also been saved. Balakian’s deliberate misrepresentation speaks volumes about his character. Like the skulls photo and the Hitler quote, this claim is fake, too.

    Then there the forced comparison between the court-proven (Nuremberg, 1945) uniquely Jewish tragedy of Holocaust versus the long discredited, political, and unsubstantiated claim of genocide. Deportation is a misnomer, because the treasonous elements were moved from one part of the country to another temporarily, until the end of the war, hence the term TERESET, temporary resettlement. Therefore, mentioning the factual Jewish Holocaust in the same breath with the bogus Armenian genocide is an insult to the silent memory of six million Jews who were killed just for being Jews. Jews did not take up arms against their own government. They did not demand German territories to establish a Jewish state on them. They did not terrorize the German countryside. They did not kill their German neighbors to the tune of 524,000 German victims. They did not join the invading enemy armies during WWII. Armenian, on the other hand, committed all of those heinous crimes during WWI and got away with them. Judging by CBS’s ethocidal coverage, the Armenians are still getting away with murder.

    Simon also failed to remind his unsuspecting audiences that Armenians resorted to a massive revolt in April 1915, killed more than 40,000 Muslims in cold blood, wrestled the city out of the Ottoman government forces , and turned it over to the invading enemy armies (Russians.) That was the equivalent of 9/11 for the Ottoman Empire. Why is it acceptable for the U.S. to cross the oceans to start a global war on terrorists in Afghanistan in 21st Century but not acceptable for the Ottoman Empire to move its terrorists from one corner of its land to another in the 20th Century?

    And the 24 April 1915, billed by the Armenian falsifiers as the start of a genocide is actually the equivalent of Guantanamo for the Ottoman Empire when known Armenian terrorists and their suspected accomplices were arrested and incarcerated for questioning. If it is good for the goose now, it should be good for the gander then. Please, no more double standards.

    Loaded terms like “death march”, “concentration camps” and claims like the Nazis learned from Turks are more recent inventions and after thoughts by the Armenian lobby, not unlike the genocide scholars, genocide curriculums, genocide lectures at Holocaust museums and Jewish synagogues. All new, all cunning steps in a master propaganda scheme, all designed to establish “credibility by association”, all funded by the Armenian lobby.

    Morgenthau, the career diplomat , historian, writer, quoted in the documentary, was actually none of those. He was a real estate agent and a developer from upstate new York who raised the most funds for Wilson in 1912 presidential campaign and was rewarded for his services by an ambassadorial post. He was a rabid anti-Turks and a Muslim hater. His book, published in 1918, was actually ghost –written by a Pulitzer Prize winner for him. Morgentahu never left Istanbul (except once for Jerusalem) but never set foot in Anatolia from where he reported. He could speak none of the languages of the era and area (Turkish, Persian, Arabic, Ottoman) so he relied on the translations and reports of his two male Armenian secretaries, Schmavonian and Andonian, hardly impartial sources of information. Morgenthau simply relayed the embellished and exaggerated reports filed by Armenian revolutionaries, American missionaries and other biased parties who could not care less about Muslims’ suffering, either directly or through American consuls in the area. As any fair-minded, honest, truth-seeker can easily see, the deck was shuffled with a pro-Armenians and anti-Turkish bias from the start.

    Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink’s assassination of 2007 was mentioned, but no word about the thousands of Turks who took to the streets condemning it. No mention, either, of the murder of Turkish Consul General Kemal Arikan in 1982 in Los Angeles or the fact that Armenians took to the streets to “celebrate it”! This is important, because both men were the same age when assassinated under similar circumstances by brain-washed youths, both married, and both had kids, both victimized by a similar hate crime. Yet, the Armenian victim (Dink) is glorified while Turkish victim is forgotten, dismissed, or ignored. Also ignored are more than 70 victims of Armenian terrorism and hate crimes since 1973. What is even more incredible that four of those victims were murdered in cold blood on American soil! Still, not a word from CBS on Turkish victims. Perhaps CBS reporter thinks Turks are expendable sub humans who deserve deaths, being of the wrong ethnicity and religion.

    BIAS & BIGOTRY IN THE TERM “ARMENIAN GENOCIDE”

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

    Turks believe it was an inter communal warfare mostly fought by Turkish and Armenian irregulars, a civil war which is engineered, provoked, and waged by the Armenian revolutionaries, with active support from Russia, England, France, and others, all eyeing the vast territories of the collapsing Ottoman Empire, against a backdrop of a raging world war.
    Armenians, on the other hand, totally ignoring Armenian agitation, raids, rebellions, treason, territorial demands, and Turkish victims killed by Armenians, unfairly claim that it was a one way genocide.

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

    While some in unsuspecting public may be forgiven for taking the blatant and ceaseless Armenian propaganda at face value and believing Armenian falsifications merely because they are repeated so often, it is difficult and painful for someone like me, the son of Turkish survivors on both maternal and paternal sides.

    Those seemingly endless “War years” of 1912-1922 brought wide-spread death and destruction on to all Ottoman citizens. No Turkish family was left touched, mine included. Those nameless, faceless Turkish victims are killed for a second time today with politically motivated and baseless charges of Armenian genocide.

    ALLEGATIONS OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ARE RACIST AND DISHONEST HISTORY

    They are racist because they ignore the Turkish dead: about 3 million during WWI; more than half a million of them at the hands of Armenian nationalists.

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

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

    1) TUMULT (as in numerous Armenian armed uprisings between 1877 and 1920)

    2) TERRORISM (by well-armed Armenian nationalists and militias victimizing Ottoman-Muslims between 1882-1920)

    3) TREASON (Armenians joining the invading enemy armies as early as 1914 and lasting until 1921)

    4) TERRITORIAL DEMANDS (where Armenians were a minority, not a majority, attempting to establish Greater Armenia, the would-be first apartheid of the 20th Century with a Christian minority ruling over a Muslim majority )

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

    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.)

    VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS AMOUNTS TO LYNCHING

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

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

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

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

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

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

    HISTORY IS A MATTER OF SCHOLARSHIP, NOT CONVICTION, CONSENSUS, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
    History is not a matter of “conviction, consensus, political resolutions, political correctness, or propaganda.” History is a matter of research, peer review, thoughtful debate, and honest scholarship. Even historians, by definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is reserved for a “competent court” with its legal expertise and due process.
    POLITICAL LYNCHING OF THE TURKS BY ARMENIANS TODAY

    What we witness today amounts to lynching of the Turks by Armenians to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry. Values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, balance, honesty, and freedom of speech are stumped under the fanatic Armenian feet. Unprovoked , unjustified, and unfair defamation of Turkey, one of America’s closest allies in the troubled Middle East, in order to appease some nagging Armenian activists runs counter to American interests.
    Those who claim genocide verdict today, based on the much discredited Armenian evidence, are actually engaging in “conviction and execution without due process”. Last time I looked in the dictionary, that was the definition of “lynching”.
    Isn’t it time to stop fighting the First World War and give peace a chance?

  • COMMUNITY ALERT

    COMMUNITY ALERT

    THIS SUNDAY FEBRUARY 28, CBS-60 MINUTES WILL AIR A SEGMENT ON THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

    PLEASE BE SURE TO WATCH. TELL YOU FRIENDS & FAMILY!

    –USE THE ‘FORWARD EMAIL’ link below.

    –SHARE THE NEWS ON FACEBOOK / TWITTER

    It is anticipated that the segment will also be available for viewing after broadcast on the 60 MINUTES WEBSITE.

    AGBU/CHICAGO BOARD

    60 MINUTES
    PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
    “BATTLE OVER HISTORY” Bob Simon reports on what the Armenians call their holocaust – the 1915 forced deportation and massacre of more than a million ethnic Armenians by the Turks – an event that the Turks and our own government have refused to call genocide. Michael Gavshon and Drew Magratten are the producers.

  • ARE YOU  “TOO BUSY” TO STAND TALL FOR YOUR CULTURE & HERITAGE?

    ARE YOU “TOO BUSY” TO STAND TALL FOR YOUR CULTURE & HERITAGE?

    Click here to send your message to the members of House Foreign Affairs Committee

    Dear All,

    Congressman Howard Berman (D-CA, 28th District) is one of the lead actors in the unfortunate scheme that is H.Res.252. For what it is worth, below, please find the summary of my conversation with HB’s staffer.

    ***

    I called Congressman Howard Berman’s Washington office at 9:00 am PST (Noon EST) and talked to Dan Harsha. After greetings, I started out with this introduction:

    “… This phone call is about H.Res. 252. We, Americans of Turkish descent, think it is replete with factual errors, omissions, and distortions. Also, it is insulting and defamatory to Turkey. If passed, not only Turkish-US relations would be harmed, but also the US Congress’ own records dating back to 1920s would have been dismissed or ignored.

    “ General Harbord’s report dated 1920 mentions “…refined Armenian atrocities victimizing Muslims…” not race killings of Armenians as alleged. H.Res.192 of 24 April 1922 states 1,414,000 Armenians being alive as of 31 December 1921, thus refuting Armenian claims of 1.5 million dead as the entire population was around that. How can one kill the entire population and still come up with 1.4 million Armenian alive?

    “ If you step back from this controversy for a minute and take a look at the big picture, you will see this: Turks and Armenians lived in harmonious co-habitation for nearly a millennium. This was changed towards the end of 19th Century and beginning of 20th Century when Armenians took up arms against their own government. Russia, England and France, of course, helped and encouraged Armenians in their revolts.

    “ Then there were Armenian agitation, raids, feuds, terrorism, and treason, all based on territorial demands towards establishing a greater Armenia. Armenians were never a majority in the lands where they lived and if greater did Armenia succeed, it would be the first apartheid of the 20th Century where a Christian minority would be ruling a Muslim majority.

    “ When Turks defended their home in the face of brutal foreign invasions and equally vicious domestic fifth column activities and revolts, through TERESET (temporary resettlement) it was reported in the Western media frequently as Muslims or Turks annihilating Armenians. The New York Times reported on the conflict 145 times in 1915 not allowing Turkish side to be heard even once; that’s how deep the bias and bigotry run in those days.

    “ Even the US Ambassador to Istanbul was merely conveying reports filed by Armenian revolutionaries and missionaries who could not care less about the Muslim suffering. Morgenthau was billed as a diplomat and a historian, whereas he was neither. He was a real estate agent and a developer from upstate New York who raised the most funds and was rewarded by Pres, Wilson with an ambassadorial post. At first, he didn’t want to go, because he wanted a more influential capital, like London, Paris, or Berlin. A Rabbi friend of his convinced him to go telling him how important the Ottoman Empire is and how the Ottomans helped Jews escape death in Iberia during the Spanish inquisitions of 1492. That’s how ignorant and biased Morgenthau was. Based on his reports, the British wartime propaganda book, the Blue Book, was published. Embellishments, feeding on falsifications, appearing in more and more exaggerated tertiary, quaternary sources and beyond… The cycle of hearsay and forgeries finally ended up in H.Res. 252…”

    (At this time, Dan Harsha interrupted saying he could not listen to me ad nauseam. Would I please wrap it up.)

    “…Let me conclude by saying that H.Res. 252 is erroneous, unfair, unwise, and unethical. What’s more, it would harm US-Turkey relations…”

    Dan Harsha responded:

    “… I appreciate hearing your views. Berman is a member of the Turkish Caucus and values Turkey’s friendship a lot. Berman doesn’t think what happened 100 years ago was Turkey’s fault or recognizing genocide would affect US-Turkey relations. He just thinks that Turkey should face its own history like Germany did about its Nazi past. Berman, himself being a survivor from the Holocaust, is sensitive about this issue…”

    Then I responded again by saying that the Jewish Holocaust is a court-proven fact, whereas the Armenia genocide is a long-discredited political claim. I stated:

    “… Holocaust is a uniquely true tragedy, while the alleged genocide is a wartime suffering that involves revolts and retaliations. Did Jews establish Jewish armies behind German lines, join invaders, terrorize the German countryside, demand German territories, in order to establish a Jewish state on German soil? Of course, not. Armenian, on the other hand, did all that and much more before, during, and after WWI. How can the two be uttered in the same breath? Isn’t that an insult to the silent memories of six million Jews exterminated for just being Jews?..”

    By this time, Dan Harsha was anxious to leave this conversation. He said he really had to go and thanked me for my time. I thanked back for his time.

    CONCLUSIONS:

    Howard Berman will vote yes. That’s too bad. Berman thinks he is doing the right thing, without realizing he is simply brainwashed by the Armenian lobby (if not also intimidated and threatened by the Armenian fanatics who gave us Armenian terrorism. Remember Hampig Sassoonian and Mourad Topalian?)

    If Berman could click on www.ethocide.com and see the photos of Armenian gangs armed to the teeth, posing proudly by the Turks they killed, gun toting Armenian priests claiming to have waged epic battles against the Turks, and many other Armenian terrorists, would Berman still believe the “poor, starving, unarmed, helpless, noncombatant Armenian” myth? Genocide, huh? What a sham!

    SOLUTIONS:

    This entire crop of pro-genocide congress people needs to be replaced with a new crop which is more educated ( and financially and electorally supported by Turkish Americans) about

    1) the other side of the story and

    2) geo-strategic, military-industrial, socio-economic, and political values of Turkey.

    3) the emerging socio-economic and political might of the Turkish Americans.

    APPEAL TO DEAR VOLUNTEERS AND FRIENDS,

    If you want to give our selfless and spirited efforts opposing H.Res.252 a helping hand, then send your message to all members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee in 30 seconds by clicking the link below right.

    Click…click… Done!

    Cost = 30 seconds of your time.

  • Proposal to Create a Framework  Uniting Diaspora Armenians

    Proposal to Create a Framework Uniting Diaspora Armenians

    sassounian33

    By Harut Sassounian

    Publisher, The California Courier

    Armenians are great believers in national unity. Actually, they are obsessed with it.

    Yet, despite all the talk about unifying the Armenian people, writing fiery poems and singing patriotic songs about the benefits of unity, this most cherished dream remains elusive. Examples of failed attempts at unity are aplenty. Even in perilous times, Armenians have remained at odds and marched to the beat of different drummers.

    However, as growing numbers of Armenians have come to realize that unity is critical for their national survival, they have managed in recent years to register modest successes in coalition building. Both the worldwide Hayastan All Armenian Fund and the U.S.-based United Armenian Fund consist of coalitions of major community organizations that carry out humanitarian work in Armenia and Artsakh (Karabagh).

    Ironically, as the proponents of unity have proliferated, so have the schemes to unify Armenians, leading to potential new divisions on how to achieve unification! There are now several such initiatives in different parts of the world, ranging from bringing all Armenian organizations under a single umbrella, to groupings of Armenian professionals, compatriotic societies and Western Armenians. In a recent column, the mere reference to the need for a Diaspora-wide organizational structure generated an overwhelmingly positive response.

    While all of the foregoing unity schemes merit serious consideration, and their advocates may end up joining hands, I wish to present some preliminary ideas which are the result of several years of reflection and serious discussions with respected individuals and community leaders in different countries.

    My proposed scheme involves the establishment of a unity framework representing Armenians throughout the Diaspora, excluding those living in the Republics of Armenia and Artsakh who are already represented by their respective governments. The estimated seven million Diasporans would be entitled to elect one representative for every 20,000 Armenians living in a particular electoral district. Candidates meeting certain pre-established qualifications can nominate themselves to represent the 20,000 Armenians in their district. Voters have to be at least 18 years old, be of Armenian origin, and have a verifiable electronic or mailing address in their electoral district. Armenians meeting these criteria can participate in the election, regardless of their citizenship, country of origin, religious or political affiliation. The election would be organized on the basis of the democratic principle of “one man, one vote!”

    In countries with a large Armenian population, several candidates would be elected to represent each group of 20,000 residents. While in sparsely Armenian-populated regions of the world, where 20,000 Armenians may be spread across several countries, one elected individual would represent the Armenian residents of those countries. Initially, there may be a low turn-out of voters. However, as the new structure gains strength and legitimacy, it will attract a greater number of participants. Elections do not have to be carried out simultaneously throughout the Diaspora. They could be held initially in one region to test the feasibility of the electoral procedures. In this regard, I wish to welcome the recent decision by French-Armenian community leaders to hold nationwide elections in France next year to select their representatives.

    It is important to note that only those elected by the public-at-large can truly state that they represent the Armenians residing in their district, while other community leaders can only claim to represent the members of their own organization! Consequently, the collective body of 350 representatives from all the electoral districts throughout the Diaspora can officially claim to represent Armenians worldwide, outside of Armenia and Artsakh.

    This collective body will have an elected chairperson or Speaker, committees and subcommittees dealing with culture, language, religion, education, foreign affairs, rights of Armenian minorities, relations with Armenia and Artsakh, Genocide recognition, demands for redress from Turkey, and financial matters.

    This 350-member body shall meet periodically and make decisions on the basis of majority vote. On certain critical issues, the body could adopt decisions by a two-thirds majority. Its decisions would reflect the views of the entire Diaspora, not just a particular organization. The existing Armenian organizations will continue to function with no hindrance or competition from this new transnational entity. In fact, the community organizations could expand their reach and increase their clout by lobbying the elected representatives of this new collective body to adopt their respective agendas. Since today’s Diaspora leaders are prominent members of their communities, it would not be surprising to see many of them elected to this new entity by popular vote.

    A key advantage of the new structure is the likelihood of its recognition by the United Nations and other regional and international organizations as a non-governmental organization (NGO) with the right to represent and speak on behalf of Diaspora Armenians.

    The representatives of the new entity in a particular city or country can also interact with local authorities on behalf of all Armenians residing in that region. For example, the recent dispute among Armenian-Americans about which group should represent the community in a meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton could have been easily avoided if the proposed transnational body were in existence. Furthermore, Armenian government officials as well as foreign leaders would know whom to call when they need to contact the elected representatives of the Diaspora.

    The representatives of this new structure could also endorse candidates in local or national elections in different countries. This role becomes crucial in key elections or when multiple Armenian candidates run for the same office and split the Armenian vote, resulting in the defeat of all Armenian candidates. Those endorsed by this body would likely enjoy the support of the majority of local voters.

    Before attempting to implement such an ambitious initiative, several important steps need to be undertaken:

    1) A team of researchers would need to study similar schemes created by Israel, Greece, Lebanon, Italy, and other countries to benefit from their experience. Such a study could be carried out by the USC Institute of Armenian Studies which would then formulate the best mechanisms to conduct elections worldwide, including estimating the number of voters in each country, qualifications of voters and candidates, and measures to prevent voter fraud. The Institute could also propose significant details about the structure and function of the collective body (meeting procedures, committees and subcommittees, recall procedures, term limits, electing chairs and vice chairs).

    2) Before any public announcement is made about the establishment of the unity framework, the organizing committee should contact the leaders of influential Diaspora organizations to acquaint them with the new initiative and welcome their suggestions and support.

    3) The organizing committee should also brief government officials in Armenia and Artsakh about the objectives of the planned organization, and secure their tacit support without their actual involvement. After the newly-elected body becomes functional, its authorized representatives would interact with officials of both Armenia and Artsakh on a regular basis. It is critical to maintain the independence of the Diaspora-wide body, in order to shield Armenian officials from pressure by foreign powers to influence the decision-making of the new entity.

    Once established, this transnational organization would create for the first time a representative body in the Diaspora with political and economic clout capable of promoting Armenian interests, preserving cultural values and defending Armenian rights worldwide.

  • Washington blames Ankara for trouble in Armenian issue

    Washington blames Ankara for trouble in Armenian issue

    meclis amerika

    MEHMET ALİ BİRAND

    Monday, February 22, 2010

    The signed historical protocols with Armenia are losing their attractiveness with each passing day. General evaluation by Washington shows that Ankara is to be blamed for the point we arrived at. The Obama administration is very negative about the future of this protocol and the “genocide” resolution.
    If we gather evaluations and statements made by those monitoring upper-level authorities in Washington closely in this regard, then a totally different scenario from what we assumed emerges.
    One of the very first steps taken by the Obama administration in order to get rid of this genocide dilemma was to bring Turkey and Armenia together for a long process of discussion. Those who characterized this as a “step taken deliberately” complain, “We spent a lot of effort and time.”
    The same circles that draw attention to the process that started with a visit by the president and continued with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton focusing on this issue say that Turkey is responsible for what happened later on.
    According to the Americans, Turkey was not able to effectively convince Azerbaijan in time. People believe that after the signing the protocols it surrendered to Baku’s brisk reaction too soon.
    The prime minister linking the condition of signing the protocols in Parliament to the Karabakh issue is perceived by them as a “fatal stroke.”
    And the decision of the Armenian Constitutional Court they perceive as an “intelligible reaction” that does not hinder the protocol in harmony with the country’s general atmosphere.

    ‘Genocide’ resolution may pass this time

    It is being called attention to how the Obama administration will react when this now in Washington prioritized issue of “genocide” resolution in respect to Turkey comes up in Congress.
    During Obama’s election campaign he attracted attention saying that he would acknowledge the Armenian genocide and if there was no further development he’d be forced to continue his attitude.
    The same authority says “the shortest and most effective way to change this situation is for Turkey to separate the Armenian protocols from a solution in Karabakh,” knowing how difficult this is. But he can’t restrain himself from saying, “There is no other way out.”
    You see there are again black clouds gathering in Washington, as typical each year. The same scenarios will be played. Mutual threats, unnecessary tension and relations harmed.
    Will Washington just observe this situation?
    The following is the answer we get:
    “Can you tell us what Turkey does to make Obama not lose his bonus by taking back his promise? Why should we put the president into a difficult situation only to please an Ankara that constantly beats Israel or is at adverse terms with us regarding Iran?”
    Recently opponents of the AKP in Washington are able to more effectively make their views public. In the beginning the Obama administration did not pay much attention and continued supporting Erdoğan. But this support has slowly eroded. They say, “We no longer can pretend not hear their voices. We have started to feel that something is fishy about Turkish foreign politics.”
    This is the latest situation in the Armenian “genocide” resolution, to the attention of all those who are related to the subject.
    © 2009 Hurriyet Daily News
    URL: www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=washington-blames-ankara-for-trouble-in-armenian-issue-2010-02-

    — On Mon, 2/22/10, Hikmet Ersoy <hikmetersoy@superonline.com> wrote:

    From: Hikmet Ersoy <hikmetersoy@superonline.com>
    Subject: TURKIYE ARTIK TEK BASINA…
    To: “Turkish Forum” <turkish-forum-advisory-board@googlegroups.com>, , “dtk (Dunya Turkleri Konseyi)” <dtk@turkishnews.com>

    Bildigimiz gibi ABD DIS Isler Komitesi 4.mart gunu bizi ilgilendiren cok kritik bir oylama yapacak.
    Anlasilan o ki uzun yillardan beri “Soykirim..” tasarisinin gecmemesi icin Kongre de Turkiye lehine lobi yapan
    Yahudi Kuruluslari Israil-Turkiye gerginligi nedeni ile bu kez seyirci kalacakmis….Ve savasmamizi beklemeyin demisler.
    ( Sebebi herhalde hepimiz biliyoruz…!!! )
    Zaten ortalikda Turk lobisi denilecek bir sey yok… Daha once Bush ve Clinton aksine karar cikmasini onlemislerdi…
    O tarihlerde Musevi lobisi gercekden bizi desteklemisti…
    Fakat anlasiliyor ki Obamanin gucu bugun yeterli olmayacak…
    AIPAC ( En guclu Israil lobisi ) parmagini bile kipirdatmayacakmis…
    ADL ( Etkili Yahudi toplulugu ) Herhangi bir calisma icinde degiliz,demis.
    JEWISH STREET – Pozisyonumuzu olmayacak demis…
    Butun bunlarin karsiliginda Turk Dis Isleri “Kiyamet kopar ve Turkiyenin baski gordugunde geri adim atan degil
    aksine cok sert….!!!! tepki veren bir yapiya sahip oldugunu ..!!!! ” hatirlatmislar ilave olarak da “ABD ile iliskilerimiz
    gozden gecirilir..” demisler….!!!!!!!!!.
    Sonucda “Haticeye degil, neticeye bakacagiz…” . Insallah Amerikalilar bu tepkimizden korkarlar….!!!!! ve
    oy birligi ile lehimize karar verirler…!!!!
    H.E