Turkish Forum

Tag: Racism

  • Global Turkish reaction to a racist remark on live TV by a Belgian politician

    Global Turkish reaction to a racist remark on live TV by a Belgian politician

    Global Turkish reaction to a racist remark on live TV  by a Belgian politician:

    “Flanders’   Slanders”:  How Would Voltaire React To them?

    A leading lawmaker in Flanders deliberately insulted Turks and Turkey during a live TV program with unsolicited racist remarks.   President of the Flemish parliament in Belgium, Jan Peter Peumans  (59,)  caused a global scandal with his arrogant and bigoted comments during a quiz show, ”De Pappenheimers,”  by VRT (Flemish Public Radio and Television Broadcasting Federated) on Wednesday, December 1, 2010.   (watch video:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQFqcaqiJi0 )

    peumans

    The question the organizers of the quiz show haplessly considered amusing and proper for a competition watched by general public, including children, was related to a comment by the famous French philosopher, Voltaire:  “Who did Voltaire think was the most disgusting nation?”  The potential answers offered were  a) Flemish,   b) Jews, and   c) Turks.   Peumans replied: “ Turks.”

    After a spontaneous laughter,  he was reminded that the correct answer was “b) Jews”.   Peumans said he knew the right answer but was scared to say it because of potential Jewish reaction.  He said he had criticized the Jewish liberal policies once and had problems with strong Jewish protests.  Laughter in the studio grew.  When asked tongue-in-cheek  “…And speaking ill about Turks is not a problem?”  Peumans replied non chalantly with a negative.  More laughter in the studio. All of this unfortunate episode took only a few minutes.  But its reverberations sure promise to take a lot more than that.

    Film director Jan Eelen, another contestant, told Peumans later that the Turkish Embassy had been informed of the incident by Güler Turan — a Flemish parliament member of Turkish heritage.  Turkish Ambassador Murat Ersavcı  did , indeed, call Peumans to convey Turkey’s disappointment by the racist question and comment.  The remarks also drew strong reactions from Turks  in and out of Belgium.

    After the initial shock and disappointment over this unfortunate racism scandal on air were over, a more reasoned approach triggered the following thoughts:

    First, it is, indeed, a sad day in Belgium if a major entertainment industry executive there thinks racist questions are fun for the entire family.  A sensitization course in Belgium on issues of diversity and tolerance seems appropriate and urgent.   Otherwise, I am afraid, we might be faced with “live roasting” of a Turk, literally, for more family fun on Belgian TV.

    Second, it must be especially ironic for such a bigoted question to surface in a country which suffered terribly under the persecution by the German Nazis (perhaps Peumans is too young to remember or too ignorant to know.)  Such a racist question should never have been asked or responded to  in the first place.  How would the audience, who cheered on so enthusiastically for the racist question and the equally racist response, respond if the next question in the live quiz show was about the feelings the German Nazis harbored:  A) cowards     B)cheap skates    C) both?   Would they consider that also to be “family fun?”

    Third, if a Belgian politician publicly declares that he deliberately provides false answers for political expediency, and still cheered on by many in Belgium, what does that tell one about the attitudes and behaviors in Belgium, administrative capital of the European Union?  Are prejudice, public humiliation, intimidation, discrimination, and racism accepted norms of thought and/or conduct in Europe?

    Fourth, Voltaire was a campaigner against tyranny and bigotry, which is probably why he could not keep out of trouble.  Voltaire, the Renaissance man of the Enlightenment, was no pussycat , either.  He always struck back with bitter, mocking, poignant sarcasm whenever he was attacked.  Voltaire often scrutinized the political and philosophical controversies of the 18th century and fought tirelessly for the oppressed.

    Mr. Peumans—and others who support or defend him–urgently need to learn the tragic plight of Jean Calas, a Protestant merchant in Toulouse, France,  which illustrates the principles of and passion in Voltaire.

    Calas had a son who wanted to study law but he was denied access because he was not a Catholic. The son got very depressed and killed himself.  Suicide was  a grave sin then. His family decided to conceal the suicide as they did not want to see the son’s body dragged in the streets and fed to dogs as was the common practice to punish postmortem  those committing suicide.  A rumor started that Jean Calas murdered his son because the son had wanted to convert to Catholicism. The old man was convicted of murder on the basis of the flimsiest hearsay evidence by lynch mobs.  Rejecting confession even after terrible torture, Calas was tied to a wooden cross, had his arms and legs were broken.  Then Calas was strangled  by the executioner and burned at the stake. The state confiscated Calas’ property, leaving his widow homeless, penniless, and childless,  as the latter were forced into Catholic institutions.

    Voltaire heard about this and set out to clear Calas. He wrote many letters to powerful people throughout Europe, hired a lawyer, and raised money for the family, eventually securing a unanimous vote in the parliament of Paris declaring Calas innocent.  Reversal of his conviction meant that his estate was restored to his family and the children were returned to their mother.   Now, that was Voltaire!

    There are three reason why this story is important:

    1)  What ultra-right leaning Belgian politician and his supporters in Belgium (and other neo-Nazis in Europe) are doing to Turks today is not much different than what the Catholic Church in France did to Protestant merchant Jean Calas of Toulouse in 1762.

    2)  If Voltaire was alive today, he would probably fight the racist Belgian politician and his supporters for the same reasons why Voltaire fought for Jean Calas of Toulouse in 1760s.

    3) Last but not least, Voltaire did comment on Turks and here is what he said:

    “ The great Turk is governing in peace twenty nations from different religions. Turks have taught the Christians how to be moderate in peace and gentle in victory.”

    It is never too late to learn a few new facts and some proper manners, Mr. Peumans.

    And that goes for the rest of neo-Nazis in Belgium, Holland, France, Austria,  and Germany where this scourge of humanity reared its ugly head again scoring a few victories in recent elections on  a blatantly racist anti-Turkish platform, complete with a promise to keep Turkey out of EU.

    Will neo-Nazis be allowed win while the rest of decent people look on silently?

    Again?

    [[petition-4]]

  • How Voltaire Would React To “Flanders’ Slanders”

    How Voltaire Would React To “Flanders’ Slanders”

    LETTERS  OF PROTEST

    03Dec10
    jan.peumans@vlaamsparlement.be, jan.peumans@riemst.be
    Dear President,
    Your comments on the quiz programme (details are below) about the Turks and Turkey can only be a reflection of your own shortcomings and does not have anything to do with Voltaire. This shows not only of your own lack of knowledge but the quiz masters and the FPRTB too.

    The facts of Turkish/Ottoman history of 400 years in Europe and signing of the Ankara agreement in 1963 with the then EEC are surely sufficient information for you to reconsider and withdraw your remarks immediately. Turks all over the world do strongly object to these kinds of racist remarks and will always be reminding you of the historical facts whether you like it or not.

    Yours,

    Betula Nelson

    Media Coordinator  The Ataturk Society of the UK

    London

    ____________________________

    How Voltaire Would React To “Flanders’   Slanders”

    A leading lawmaker in Flanders deliberately insults Turks and Turkey during a live TV program with unsolicited racist remarks.

    President of the Flemish parliament in Belgium, Jan Peter Peumans  (59,)  causes a scandal with his arrogant and bigoted comments during a quiz show, ”De Pappenheimers,”  by VRT (Flemish Public Radio and Television Broadcasting Federated) on Wednesday, December 1, 2010.   (watch video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQFqcaqiJi0 )

    The question the organizers of the quiz show haplessly considered amusing and proper for a competition watched by general public, including children, was a related to  a comment by the famous French philosopher:  “Who did Voltaire think was the most disgusting nation?”  The potential answers offered were Flemish, Jews and Turks.  Peumans replied: “ Turks.”

    After a loud laughter, he was reminded that the correct answer was “the Jews”.  Peumans said he knew the right answer but was scared to say it because of possibly very strong Jewish reaction.  Laughter in the audience grew.  When asked “Wouldn’t the Turks do react equally strongly?”  Peumans replied with a negative.

    Film director Jan Eelen, another contestant, told Peumans later that the Turkish Embassy had been informed of the incident by Güler Turan — a Flemish parliament member of Turkish heritage.  Turkish Ambassador Murat Ersavcı  called Peumans to convey Turkey’s disappointment by the racist question and comment.  The remarks also drew strong reactions from Turks  in and out of Belgium.

    All of this unfortunate episode took only a few minutes.  But its reverberations promise to take more than that… much more!

    First, it is, indeed, a sad day in Belgium if a major entertainment industry executive there thinks racist questions are fun for the entire family.  A sensitization course in Belgium on issues of diversity and tolerance seems appropriate and even urgent.

    Second, it must be especially ironic for such a bigoted question to surface in a country which suffered terribly under the racist persecution the Nazis (perhaps Peumans is too young to remember or too ignorant to know.)  Such a question should never have been asked in the first place.  How would the audience who cheered on the racist questions and response if the next question in the live quiz show was about the feelings of the German Nazis about Belgians and if the potential answers offered were  A) cowards     B)cheap skates    C) both?   Would they consider that to be “family fun?”

    Third, if a Belgian politician publicly declares that he deliberately provides false answers for political correctness or expediency, and cheered on by millions in and around Belgium, and arguably around Europe, what does that tell one about the state of affairs and mind in Europe?  Are prejudice, humiliation, intimidation, discrimination, and racism accepted norms of thought and/or conduct in Belgium and/or Europe?

    Fourth, Voltaire was a crusader against tyranny and bigotry, which is probably why he could not keep out of trouble.  Almost every person of importance was Voltaire’s enemy at some period of his life.  Voltaire, the Renaissance man of the Enlightenment, was no pussycat , either, as he struck back with bitter, mocking, poignant sarcasm whenever he was attacked.

    Voltaire often scrutinized the political and philosophical controversies of the 18th century and campaigned tirelessly on behalf of the oppressed.

    You, Mr. Peumans, badly need to learn the tragic plight of Jean Calas, a Protestant in Toulouse, which illustrates the passion in Voltaire.  Calas had a son who wanted to study law but he was denied access because he was not a Catholic. The son got very depressed and killed himself, a fatal sin then. His family decided to conceal the suicide as they did not want to see his body dragged in the streets and fed to dogs as was the common practice for those who took their own lives.  A rumor started that Jean Calas had murdered his son because he wanted to convert to Catholicism. The old man was convicted of murder on the basis of the flimsiest hearsay evidence by lynch mobs. Rejecting confession even after terrible torture, Calas was tied to a wooden cross, had his arms and legs broken.  Then he was strangled  by the executioner and burned at the stake. The state confiscated his property, leaving his widow homeless, penniless, and childless,  as the latter were forced into Catholic institutions.

    Voltaire heard about this and set out to clear Calas. He wrote many letters to powerful people throughout Europe, hired a lawyer, and raised money for the family. eventually securing a unanimous vote in the parliament of Paris declaring Calas innocent.  Calas himself was dead but the reversal of his conviction meant that his estate was returned to his family and the children returned to their mother.   That was Voltaire!

    I told you this story for two reasons:

    1)  You and your supporters are doing to Turks today what the Catholic Church did to Protestant merchant Jean Calas of Toulouse in 1762.

    2)  If Voltaire was alive today, he would fight you and your kind for the same reasons he fought for Jean Calas of Toulouse

    Last but not least, here is what Voltaire really said about the Turks:

    “ The great Turk is governing in peace twenty nations from different religions. Turks have taught the Christians how to be moderate in peace and gentle in victory.”

    It is never too late to learn new facts and proper manners.

    Sincerely,

    (Name, full street address, and phone)

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

    jan.peumans@vlaamsparlement.be, jan.peumans@riemst.be

  • Austria, angered with “virus” criticism, summons Turkey envoy

    Austria, angered with “virus” criticism, summons Turkey envoy

    Tezcan said it was incredible that the Austrian Interior Ministry was responsible for integration as a whole and not just visas and security.
    Wednesday, 10 November 2010 14:03
    ecvet tezcan

    Turkish Ambassador in Vienna Kadri Ecvet Tezcan was summoned to the Austrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the interview he gave to Die Presse, criticizing the integration policies.

    Tezcan told reporters that he gave the interview in order to draw attention to unjust and wrong policies in integration, and open the issue to debate in the public opinion.

    In the interview, Tezcan criticised the Austrian government’s integration policies towards the Turkish immigrants, saying that the Turkish population was ghettoized and treated as if they were a virus. Tezcan who questioned why Ministry of the Interior oversaw the integration issue, rather than the Ministry of Social Affairs or the Ministry of Family, said it made Turks, ask themselves, whether they were perceived as a matter of security.

    “Like a virus”

    Tezcan also told the daily that Austrian parties were not doing enough to counter the far-right which has gained electoral support on an anti-Muslim platform.

    Tezcan said Austrians were not interested in other cultures except when they went on holiday. Turkish people form the biggest Muslim community in Austria.

    “Turkish people are happy, they don’t want anything from you. They just don’t want to be handled like a virus. Society should integrate them and profit from them,” he said.

    At the start of Wednesday’s article, Die Presse quoted Tezcan as saying: “Do you want me to respond in this interview like a diplomat, which will be boring? Or should I answer as someone who has lived in Vienna for a year and has lots of contact with the 250,000 Turkish people here?”

    In the interview, Tezcan said it was incredible that the Austrian Interior Ministry was responsible for integration as a whole and not just visas and security.

    “The Interior Ministry should stop intervening in the integration process,” he said, because this meant all integration problems were handled by the police. Tezcan also criticised Interior Minister Maria Fekter, a conservative, saying she was “in the wrong party” because she did not embody liberal values of her centre-right party.

    “I spoke with the interior minister (about my concerns), she didn’t want to hear it. She is in the wrong party,” he said.

    Austria’s Foreign Ministry summoned Tezcan over the interview and Minister Michael Spindelegger telephoned his Turkish counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu to complain.

    “He crossed many red lines. His remarks were ‘unacceptable’,” spokesman Alexander Schallenberg said.

    The Austrian Foreign Ministry said Turkey’s Davutoglu had not known about the interview and Vienna did not think that it represented Ankara’s views. Schallenberg said Austria wanted to keep up good bi-lateral relations.

    Turkey and Austria have important ties in the energy sector. Turkey plays a role in the Vienna-based Nabucco gas pipeline project and Austrian oil and gas group OMV wants develop it as an energy hub for Europe.

    Agencies

  • NHS accused of racism

    NHS accused of racism

    The NHS has been accused of racism after figures showed applicants from ethnic minorities find it harder to get a job, are more likely to be bullied if they do and have more grievances taken out against them.

    Figures from the South East Coast NHS, one of ten regions in England, found that although black and minority ethnic groups made up almost a third of applicants for jobs they only represented 16 per cent of appointees.

    Rob Berkeley, deputy director of the Runnymede Trust, a racial equality think tank, told the Health Service Journal: “The patterns are broad enough to suggest it’s about institutional racism. The NHS has been slower to address it.”

    The data show three per cent of the 193 executive directors were black and ethnic minority in origin along with only 2.5 per cent of non-executive directors.

    Candy Morris, chief executive of NHS South East Coast, said: “We recognise that we need to do more to address the needs of black and minority ethnic patients and members of the public as well as provide greater leadership opportunities for black and minority ethnic staff members.”

    A spokesman for the Department of Health said The Race Equality Service Review had shown there were still areas of concern.

    The Telegraph

  • Big Powers May Not Save Kyrgyzstan

    Big Powers May Not Save Kyrgyzstan

    If Kyrgyz-style violence should radiate across borders in Central Asia, the result could be a rise in Islamic militancy that would directly threaten Russia and the United States.
    Diplomatic Memo

    Value to Big Powers May Not Save Kyrgyzstan

    MEMO articleLarge

    Bryan Denton for The New York Times

    Roza Otunbayeva, the head of the provisional government in Kyrgyzstan, landing by helicopter in the southern city of Osh on Friday, after days of ethnic fighting there.

    By ELLEN BARRY
    Published: June 18, 2010

    MOSCOW — A year and a half ago, the world’s great powers were fighting like polecats over Kyrgyzstan, a landlocked stretch of mountains in the heart of Central Asia.

    Related

    • Some Refugees Begin Returning to Kyrgyzstan (June 19, 2010)
    • Times Topic: Kyrgyzstan

    The United States was ferociously holding on to the Manas Air Base, a transit hub considered crucial to NATO efforts in Afghanistan. Russia was so jealous of its traditional dominance in the region that it promised the Kyrgyz president $2.15 billion in aid the day he announced he was closing Manas. With the bidding war that followed, Kyrgyzstan could be forgiven for seeing itself as a global player. And yet for the past week, as spasms of violence threatened to break Kyrgyzstan apart, its citizens saw their hopes for an international intervention flicker and die. With each day it has become clearer that none of Kyrgyzstan’s powerful allies — most pointedly, its former overlords in Moscow — were prepared to get involved in a quagmire. Russia did send in several hundred paratroopers, but only to defend its air base at Kant. For the most part, the powers have evacuated their citizens, apparently content to wait for the conflict to burn itself out. The calculus was a pragmatic one, made “without the smallest thought to the moral side of the question,” said Aleksei V. Vlasov, an expert in the politics of post-Soviet countries at Moscow State University. “We use the phrase ‘collective responsibility,’ but in fact this is a case of collective irresponsibility,” he added. “While they were fighting about whatever — about bases, about Afghanistan — they forgot that in the south of Kyrgyzstan there was extreme danger. The city was flammable. All they needed to do was throw a match on it.” He referred to the city of Osh, which suffered days of ethnic rioting. Kyrgyzstan might have unraveled anyway, but competition between Moscow and Washington certainly sped the process. To lock in its claim on the base after the threat of expulsion, the United States offered President Kurmanbek S. Bakiyev $110 million to back out of his agreement with Russia, which had already paid him $450 million. Congratulating itself on its victory, Washington raised the stakes by announcing the construction of several military training facilities in Kyrgyzstan, including one in the south, which further irritated Moscow. This spring, the Kremlin won back its lost ground, employing a range of soft-power tactics to undermine Mr. Bakiyev’s government. Mr. Bakiyev was ousted by a coalition of opposition leaders in April, and conditions in Kyrgyzstan’s south — still loyal to the old government — hurtled toward disaster. “Let’s be honest, Kyrgyzstan is turning into a collapsing state, or at least part of it is, and what was partially responsible is this geopolitical tug of war we had,” said Alexander A. Cooley, who included Manas in a recent book about the politics of military bases. “In our attempts to secure these levers of influence and support the governing regime, we destabilized these state institutions. We are part of that dynamic.” Last week, as pillars of smoke rose off Osh and Jalal-Abad, citizens begged for third-party peacekeepers to replace local forces they suspected of having taken part in the violence. Roza Otunbayeva, the head of Kyrgyzstan’s interim government, asked Moscow for peacekeepers, and when that request was denied, for troops to protect strategic sites like power plants and reservoirs. She asked Washington to contribute armored vehicles from the base at Manas, which she said would be used to transport the dead and wounded, she told the Russian newspaper Kommersant. So far, Moscow and Washington have responded mostly with humanitarian aid pledges — late on Friday, Russia’s Defense Ministry said that Ms. Otunbayeva’s request was still under consideration. The United States, overextended in Afghanistan and Iraq, has neither the appetite nor the motivation for a new commitment. Russia, the more obvious player, sees the risks of a deployment outweighing the benefits. Russian troops would enter hostile territory in south Kyrgyzstan, where Mr. Bakiyev’s supporters blame Moscow for his overthrow, and Uzbekistan could also revolt against a Russian presence. Mr. Vlasov, of Moscow State University, said: “Who are we separating? Uzbeks from Kyrgyz? Krygyz from Kyrgyz? Kyrgyz from some criminal element? There is no clearly defined cause of this conflict. It would be comparable to the decision the Soviet Politburo made to invade Afghanistan — badly thought through, not confirmed by the necessary analytical work.” If the explosion of violence was a test case for the Collective Security Treaty Organization, an eight-year-old post-Soviet security group dominated by Russia, it seems to have failed, its leaders unwilling to intervene in a domestic standoff. In any case, neither the Russian public nor the county’s foreign policy establishment is pressing the Kremlin to risk sending peacekeepers. “If you send them, you have to shoot sooner or later,” said Sergei A. Karaganov, a prominent political scientist in Moscow. “Then you are not a peacekeeper, but something else.” Though it seems that the worst of the violence has passed, great challenges remain. Beyond the immediate humanitarian crisis is an unstable state at the heart of a dangerous region. The Ferghana Valley, bordering Afghanistan, is a minefield of religious fundamentalism, drug trafficking and ethnic hatreds. If Kyrgyz-style violence should radiate across borders in Central Asia, the result could be a rise in Islamic militancy that would directly threaten Russia and the United States. The failure of international institutions last week should alarm both capitals. President Obama and President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia began their relationship with the crisis over the Manas base, and as they grope toward tentative collaboration in the post-Soviet space, Kyrgyzstan has dominated their conversation. Now, Kyrgyzstan needs help building a stable government that knits together the north and the south. Dmitri V. Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, suggested that NATO should be working with the members of the Collective Security Treaty Organization to develop a mechanism for collective action. The next time a Central Asian country is wobbling at the edge of a precipice, he said, someone must be prepared to accept responsibility. “You can abstain from a local conflict in Kyrgyzstan,” Mr. Trenin said. “You can close your eyes to it — it’s bad for your conscience — but you can live with it. If something happens in Uzbekistan, you will not be able to just let it burn out.”

  • We should thank Congressman Kuchinich

    We should thank Congressman Kuchinich

    Friends,

    I think we should thank Congressman Kucinich for his letter in support of Turkey, a first in the U.S. Congress:

    Ergun

    Kucinich Circulating Letter to Colleagues Regarding Mavi Marmara Incident

    Congressman Kucinich 111th

    Washington, Jun 2 –

    Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is today beginning to circulate to colleagues the following letter concerning the commando raid by Israel upon a Turkish ship in international waters:

    June 2, 2010


    The Honorable Barack Obama
    President of the United States
    The White House
    Washington, DC 20500
    Dear Mr. President,
    Israeli commandos, acting at the direction of the State of Israel, attacked and seized a Turkish ship in international waters, in the Mediterranean Sea.
    At least nine were killed in the incident aboard the Mavi Marmara.  Hundreds of civilians were taken into custody and goods were confiscated. Since the United States considers Israel our most important ally in the region, whose survival is a primary concern, it is incumbent upon the Commander in Chief to call Israel to an accounting for its conduct in planning and executing the deadly military attack in international waters upon a peaceful flotilla carrying citizens from over 50 countries.
    The State of Israel’s conduct, attacking a Turkish ship in international waters, constitutes an act of belligerence against Turkey, which at one time Israel considered an important ally. It also undermines United States’ troops efforts in Iraq, since your administration’s efforts to achieve stability in the region and to withdraw troops from Iraq has depended upon Turkey’s cooperation through use of its air bases.
    In its violent commando raid on the Mavi Marmara, the government of Israel showed no concern as to how its conduct may affect the lives of defenseless, innocent people, its friends and allies, and in particular the United States. The United States must remind Israel as well as all of our other friends and allies:

    It is not acceptable to repeatedly violate international law.

    It is not acceptable to shoot and kill innocent civilians.

    It is not acceptable to commit an act of aggression against another U.S. ally.

    It is not acceptable to continue a blockade which denies humanitarian relief.

    It is not acceptable to heighten tensions in a region while the United States continues to put so much blood and treasure on the line.

    The State of Israel’s action necessitates that the United States, which is Israel’s partner in the region, begin to redefine its relationship and to establish such boundaries and conditions which are sufficient for mutual respect and cooperation.

    It is incumbent upon Israeli officials to bring forth the truth about the planning for and the attack upon the Mavi Marmara.

    No one questions the right of Israel to defend its border, but that defense does not extend to shooting innocent civilians anywhere in the world, anytime it pleases.

    Israel must account for our support, for the lives of our soldiers, for the investment of billions from our taxpayers.  Israel owes the United States more than reckless, pre-meditated violence waged against innocent people.
    The attack on the Mavi Marmara requires consequences for the Netanyahu Administration and for the State of Israel. Those consequences must be dealt by the United States. They must be diplomatic and they must be financial. The U.S. can begin by calling for an independent international inquiry of the Mavi Marmara incident. The integrity of such inquiry necessitates that it not be led by the nation whose conduct is under scrutiny. If our nation fails to act in any substantive way, the United States licenses the violence and we are complicit in it and our own citizens will be forced to pay the consequences.

    We the undersigned deeply regret the loss of life. We are also fully aware of the dangers to world security which exist in the region, which is why the United States has been unstinting it its defense of Israel. We have a right to expect that Israel not add to those dangers with military conduct which all people of good will know is neither defensible nor moral. There must be consequences for such conduct. We await your response.
    Sincerely,
    ===============================================================================

    Ergun Bey, thanks for bringing this to our attention.  This is what I wrote:

    Dear Congressman Kucinich,

    Your stance on the Mavi Marmara incident is laudable.  It is about time that the US government re-evaluates its “no-questions asked” support of the Israeli government in just about every issue.  The current Israeli policy undermines not only the interests of the American people, but also the interests of a world yearning for peace.  Certainly, the key stone of a lasting peace is first the resolution of the conflict between Israel and Palestine.  I think Turkey is playing a critical role in bringing out to the open this ever so festering Gaza blockade. The whole international community, including the UN, has condemned the Israeli blockade of Gaza and concomitant actions in the Mavi Marmara incident.  As the prime minister of Turkey, Davutoglu, has put it succinctly, it is not a matter of choosing between Turkey and Israel in the aftermath of the latter’s dastardly act in the open seas, but it is a matter of choice between right and wrong.  Once again, I commend you for standing on the right side of this issue rather than succumbing to the so often displayed knee-jerk reaction in this country to stand by Israel no matter what.

    Keep up the good work, and thank you,

    Sevgin Oktay