„MiLLi DEGERLERiNi YiTiRMiS ULUSLAR, BASKA MiLLETLERiN AVIDIR“
Turkce Karakterler Kullanilmisdir Okumak Icin Turkish ISO Veya UTF-8 Tarayici Dil Kodlamasini Seciniz.
Please Set Your Browzers To UTF-8 Or Turkish ISO
TURKISH FORUM GRUBUNUZA BA$ARILARININ DEVAMI iCiN DESTEK OLUNUZ !
TO SUPPORT TURKISHFORUM IS TO SUPPORT TO WIN ISSUES OF YOUR FUTURE GENERATIONS.
| Turkish Forum is a Network, PR and a Lobbying Foundation
Turk Forum Dayanisma, Halkla Iliskiler & Lobi kurulusudur | |
Turkish Forum’u Ya$atacak Olan
DESTEGiNiZi, AiDATLARINIZI VE BAGISLARINIZI LUTFEN YARINA BIRAKMAYINIZ
http://www.turkishforum.com/tr/bagis.html
EDITORIALS:
1- De facto taksim ve ABD …. Rauf DENKTAS
2- 24 NiSAN VE SOYKIRIM YALANLARI ..M. Torehan SERDAR
3- AVUSTURALYADAN BiR MEKTUP : Fallacious Armenian Genocide allegations … Ataman Atlas
From: Nihat Canikli [mailto:ncanikli@gmail.com]
De facto taksim ve ABD
Rauf DENKTAS
ABD'nin "Kibris Cumhuriyeti" dedigi bir ulkeye yeni Buyukelci atandi. Halbuki esas atama gaspci Rum idaresinedir. Buyukelci Sn. Urbansick yaz aylarinda goreve baslayacak. Washington'da yaptigi aciklamaya bakarsak ABD Kibris meselesine teshis koymamakta ve 1964'de baslattigi Rum-Yunan yanlisi siyasetini surdurmeye kararlidir. Buyukelci Urbansick'e gore "Kibris'in de facto taksimi Kibrisli Turklerle Rumlara aci; bolgedeki Amerikan stratejik cikarlarina zarar veriyor... Iki cemaat lideri ayni seyi istiyor, ayni hedefe sahip olduklarina gore mesele iki bolgeli, iki toplumlu federasyon seklinde en erken bir zamanda halledilmeli"... kendileri de bu yonde agirligini koyacakmis.
ABD Kibris meselesine teshis koymaktan kacinmaktadir, cunku meseleye teshis koydugu takdirde, eli kanli, suclu, terorist Makarios idaresini "mesru hukumet" olarak kabul ettigi andan itibaren Kibris meselesinin Rumlar lehine halledilmis oldugunu itiraf etmek zorunda kalacaktir. Boyle bir itiraf sonunda da Turk tarafinin attigi her adimin ve varmis oldugu sonucun (KKTC'nin) mesru oldugunu teslim etmek zorunda kalacaktir.
ABD de bilmektedir ki, Kibris'ta Rum-Yunan ikilisinin oyunu Kibris'in tumune sahip cikmaktir ve kendilerine bahsedilen "mesru hukumet" unvanini bu yonde en etkin bir vasita olarak kullanmaktadir. Ve ABD yetkilileri yine biliyorlar ki Turkiye'nin -yani en guclu muttefiklerinin- Kibris uzerinde Uluslararasi Antlasmalarla tescil edilmis vazgecilmez haklari vardir. 1960 Antlasmalari ile olusan duzenin Garantilenmis, Enosise-Taksime kapali, Turk Yunan dengesine oturtulmus olan ortaklik Devletini yikan ve Enosis'i hedefleyen taraf Turk tarafi olmamistir. ABD yetkilileri yine bilmektedirler ki KKTC Kibris'i bolmek icin kurulmus degildir; kendi devletinden, bagimsizligindan 20 yil mahrum edilmis olan Kibris Turk halkinin insanca yasama hakkinin ve 1960 dengesini koruma siyasetinin bir geregi olarak ilan edilmistir. KKTC'nin ilan edildigi gunden itibaren taninma helal hakkidir, bunu devamli surette bu gune kadar engellemis olan ise ABD olmustur. Sonuc "de facto taksim" olmussa, "de jure iki devlet haline donusmemisse" bunun da sorumlusu yine ABD'dir.
Simdi Sn. Urbansick bu bilinenleri teyit etmekle kalmiyor, ayni siyasete devam edeceklerini de duyuruyor. Bugunku bolunme de facto ise bunun nedeni ABD'nin KKTC'yi taninmasini onlemek icin yapmis oldugu ahlaka ve insanliga sigmayan girisimlerdir. KKTC taninmis olaydi, Cek - Slovak usulu bir anlasma ve iki devlet arasinda yeni, daha saglam, yikilmaz, yirtilip atilmaz bir uzlasma coktan yapilmis olacakti. Boyle bir sonucun Yunan lobisini kizdirmanin otesinde Amerika'nin stratejik cikarlarina nasil ters dusecegini anlamak mumkun degildir. ABD'nin iki devlet esasina dayali kalici bir anlasmaya karsi olusu da bolgenin istikrari acisindan
Oyle anlasiliyor ki kendi bolgesel stratejik cikari icin Irak'a "demokrasi goturen" ABD, Kibris'ta da Rum-Yunan ikilisini desteklemekle adadaki demokrasiyi destekledigini zannetmektedir. Bu tek tarali siyasetinin Uluslararasi Antlasmalarla var olan iki ayri demokrasiden birini yok farz edip, iki esit halktan da birini tercih ederek digerine insanlik acisindan
Yazi Tarihi: 20/04/2008
M. Torehan SERDAR
24 NiSAN VE SOYKIRIM YALANLARI
Bin yIldIr Anadolu topraklarInI kendisine yurt eden yuce Turk milleti, gittigi her yere adalet, barI$ ve medeniyet goturmu$, hukumranlIgI altInda ya$ayan kavimlere Turk-islam ho$gorusu icinde davranmI$tIr. Bu dun de boyleydi, bugunde boyle, yarIn da boyle olacaktIr.
Anadolu topraklarInda sekiz yuz yIlI a$kIn bir sure Ermenilerle beraber ya$adIk. Onlara hamilik yaptIk. Turkun ho$gorusuyle ezilmekten, hor gorulmekten kurtulmu$, insanca ya$amayI bilmi$lerdir. Ermeni aydInlarI bunu hicbir zaman inkar etmemi$lerdir.
19. yIlla beraber geli$en milliyetcilik akImlarI, emperyalist devletlerin doymaz ihtiraslarI, misyonerlerin faaliyetleri, “Millet-i SadIka (SadIk Millet) dedigimiz Ermenileri alabildigince kullanmI$, Ermeni isyanlarIna kapI acmI$tIr. Tarih boyunca maceraperest ya$ayan Ermeni halkI ve onlarIn cete liderleri, velinimeti olan Turk milletine isyan etmi$, en zor gununde arkadan hancerlemi$tir.
Umutsuz hayaller pe$inde dola$an Ermeni halkI, emperyalist guclerin kI$kIrtmasIyla isyana ve Musluman Turk halkIna kar$I buyuk bir soykIrIma kalkI$mI$tIr. DunyanIn hicbir ulkesinde bu harekete ho$goruyle kar$IlIk verilmez. En zor gunun de bile asaletinden vazgecmeyen Turk milleti bu ihaneti cezasIz bIrakmI$, Ermenileri tehcirle (surgun-mecburi iskan) odullendirmi$tir. Bu tehcir gercekten bir ceza degil, Ermenilere verilen bir oduldur. DivanI-I Harpte kur$una dizilerek cezalandIrIlmasI gerekenler basit bir yer degi$tirmeyle geci$tirilmi$tir.
Turkun bu ho$gorusu altInda ezilen emperyalist devletler, koca bir tarihi yalan uydurarak asIlsIz soykIrImI ulkemizin, insanlarImIzIn ve dunya kamuoyunun gundemine ta$ImI$lardIr. Musluman Turk milletinin bu canilerden hesap sormasI gerekirken, sanIk sandalyesinde kendisini bulmu$tur. Rahmetli Akif de oyle diyor ya;
Kol gezmekte cani, can vermekte masum,
Suc ba$kasInIn da nicin ba$kasI mahkûm.
Tarih varsayImlarla, asIlsIz dedikodularla yazIlmaz. Gercek tarih er gec ortaya cIkacak, caniler ve onlarIn arkasIndaki emperyalist gucler hak ettikleri cezayI goreceklerdir.
Bir 24 Nisan daha gelip kapIya dayandI. Acaba bu cirkin yalanI
BasIndan takip ettigim kadarIyla bu yIl soykIrIm yalanInI israil’de gundemine almI$tIr. Bo$una dememi$ler; “besle kargayI, oysun gozunu”. 500 yIl once Yahudi milleti ispanya’da yok edilirken, OsmanlI SultanlarI onlarI kurtardI. O gun onlara elimizi uzatmasaydIk, belki bugun ne israil Devleti olacak, ne de oradaki masum, savunmasIz Filistin halkI Yahudiler tarafIndan soykIrIma tabi tutulacaktI. VarlIklarInI bizlere borclu olan israil halkI, minnetini bize asIlsIz yalanlarla, insanlarImIzI karalamakla, zan altIna bIrakmakla odemektedir. Her gun onlarca savunmasIz cocuk ve kadInlarI katleden israil halkIndan da ancak bu beklenir. Hz. Ali (k.v); “falankes seni oldurmek istiyor” dediklerinde, “Ben ona iyilik etmedim ki beni oldursun” diye cevap vermi$tir. israil’de; 500 yIl once yaptIgImIz iyiligin kar$IlIgInI veriyor.
Yine basInda yazIldIgIna gore Beyaz Saray’In birkac blok ilerisindeki 83 yIllIk National Bank binasI, muze yapIlmasI icin Amerika Ermeni Asamblesi’ne (AEA) verildi. AEA, binayI 2010’da “Ermeni SoykIrImI Muzesi” olarak acmayI planladIklarInI acIkladI. Muzenin Erivan’daki “SoykIrIm Muzesi”ne benzer olacagInI belirten AEA yetkilileri, burada ce$itli fotograf ve belgelerin sergileneceklerini ifade etmi$lerdir.
ABD’nin Turkiye uzerindeki her zamanki oyunlarIndan birine daha tanIk olmaktayIz. AslInda ABD’den once bizim yetkililere kIzmamIz lazIm. Erivan’daki soykIrIm muzesinin benzeri Va$ington’da yapIlacak. Gelen misafir veya turistlere mutlaka gezdirilerek ulkemiz alabildigine kotulenecektir. Peki, bizde boyle bir muze var mI? Gelen yabancI yetkililere gosterebiliyor muyuz? Maalesef hayIr. O zaman soyler misiniz; Ermeni muzesini gezen birisi bize mi, yoksa onlara mI inanacak? SoykIrIm yalanInI
Okuyuculara gecmi$i hatIrlatmak, ulkemiz uzerinde oynanan oyuna dikkat cekmek icin Ermeni tehciri ve soykIrIm iddialarInI buraya alIyorum. Her Turk evladInIn bu oyunlarI iyi sezmesi, ona gore tedbir almasI gerekir.
TEHCiRE GiDEN YOL
Tarih sayfalarIna baktIgImIzda Ermenilerin surekli goc halinde olduklarInI gormekteyiz. Bu goclerin buyuk cogunlugu surgun $eklinde olmu$tur. Musluman Turk hakimiyetinin dI$Indaki yoneticiler, Ermeni milletini surekli surgun ederek goce tabi tutmu$lar. Ermenilerin huzur icinde ya$adIklarI tek donem varsa, o da Turk hakimiyetinde olduklarI donemdir. Bunu aklI ba$Indaki butun Ermeniler
Tarih boyunca Ermeniler; Sasaniler, Bizans imparatorlugu (II. Basil, IX. Konstantin Monomak) Mogollar, Memluklular ve CarlIk Rusya tarafIndan surekli bir yerlere surulmu$lerdir. Ozellikle Bizans surgunleri Ermeni UrfalI Mateos tarafIndan agIr bir dille ele$tirilmi$, Yunan halkI alabildigince kotulenmi$tir. Ermenilerin surekli goce tabi tutulmalarInIn nedeni $unlara dayanmaktadIr:
- Ermenilerin paraya ve servete du$kunlukleri,
- Ermenilerin maceraperest bir ruha sahip olmalarI,
- HIristiyanlIktaki mezhep kavgalarI, Ermenilerin Ortodokslar tarafIndan hor
gorulmeleri ve dini baskIlar,
- Ermenilerin tarih boyunca hamilerine kar$I ihanet icinde bulunmalarI.
- iclerinde insan sevgisinin olmamasI, bu sevginin yerini menfaatin almasIdIr. Bu nedenler Ermeni tarihine hep yon vermi$tir.
TEHCiR KARARININ ALINMASI
Ermenilerin bugun dahi toplantIlarInda, mitinglerinde, gosterilerinde ve her kanlI cinayetlerinden sonra ileri surdukleri dile getirdikleri nedenlerden ba$Inda ERMENi TEHCiRi - GOCE ZORLAMA meselesidir.
OsmanlI Devletinin seferberlik ilanI ve daha sonra da Birinci Dunya Sava$Ina girmesiyle:
1 - Ermenilerin davranI$larI,
2 - CIkardIklarI isyanlar,
3 - Ermeni cetelerinin Turk ve Musluman ahaliyi top yekûn oldurmeye giri$meleri,
4 - Ermenilerin du$manlarla i$birligi yapmalarI,
5 - Turk Ordusunu arkadan vurmaya kalkmalarI,
OsmanlI Hukumetinin Ermeniler hakkInda tedbir almaya, Ermenileri bulunduklarI bolgeden cIkararak ba$ka yerlere goce zorlamaya mecbur etmi$ti. OsmanlI Devleti 11 Nisan 1331 (24 Nisan 1915) tarihine kadar, yani seferberlikten dokuz ay sonrasIna kadar, Ermeni isyanlarIna kar$I yalnIz mahalli ve ozel tedbirler almakla yetindi. Van'In du$mesi ve Rus ordusunun dogu illeri uzerine yurumesi sIralarInda, ozellikle onculuk
OsmanlI Devleti’nin Ermenilere kar$I aldIgI bu tedbirler, istanbul’da Avusturya-Macaristan imparatorlugu Askeri Ata$esi Joseph Pomiankowski tarafIndan $oyle anlatIlmaktadIr:
“Talat ve
ingiltere’nin OsmanlI Devleti’ne vazifeli olarak gonderdigi Yuzba$I Norman da bu konuyla ilgili olarak $unlarI ifade etmektedir:
“Turk-Ermeni catI$masIna ait gercekleri ogrenmenin artIk zamanI geldi. $imdiye kadar karI$IklIklarI sadece Ermenilerin anlattIgI ve ingiliz dostlarInIn heyecan cIglIklarIyla susledigi $ekilleriyle duyduk. Henuz OsmanlIlarIn savunmasInI dinlemedik. Katliam, yagma ve kadInlara tecavuz hikayelerini bIkIncaya kadar duyduk; fakat bunlarIn hicbiri bir tek AvrupalI gorgu $ahidi tarafIndan dogrulanmamI$tIr.”
Van'da Ermeni isyanI butun hIzIyla devam ettigi bir sIrada, istanbul'a, diger bolgelerde de Ermenilerin isyan ettikleri, yol kestikleri, Musluman koylerini basarak halkInI katlettikleri yolunda haberler geldi. Turk ordusu sava$ alanInda oldugu icin cephe gerisindeki bu olaylarI onleyemiyordu. Nihayet Ba$kumandan Vekili Enver Pa$a bu duruma bir care olmak uzere, 2 MayIs 1915'te Dahiliye NazIrI Talat Pa$a'ya $u yazIyI yolladI: "Van golu etrafInda ve Van valiligince bilinen belirli yerlerdeki Ermeniler, isyanlarInI surdurmek icin daima toplu ve hazIr bir haldedirler. Toplu halde bulunan Ermenilerin buralardan cIkarIlarak isyan yuvasInIn dagItIlmasI du$uncesindeyim. 3. Ordu komutanlIgInIn verdigi bilgiye gore Ruslar 20 Nisan 1915'te kendi sInIrlarI icindeki MuslumanlarI sefil ve peri$an bir halde sInIrlarImIzdan iceriye sokmu$lardIr. Hem buna kar$IlIk olmak ve hem yukarIda belirttigim amacI saglamak icin, ya bu Ermenileri aileleriyle birlikte Rus sInIrI icine gondermek yahut bu Ermenileri ve ailelerini Anadolu icinde ce$itli yerlere dagItmak gereklidir. Bu iki $ekilden uygun olanIn secilmesiyle tatbikini rica ederim. Bir mahsur yoksa isyancIlarIn ailelerini ve isyan bolgesi halkInI sInIrlarImIz dI$Ina gondermeyi ve onlarIn yerine sInIrlarImIz icine dI$arIdan gelen Musluman halkIn yerle$tirilmesini tercih ederim.”.
Tehcir kararInIn ilk i$areti sayIlan bu yazI ile
2 MayIs 1915 tarihinde Ba$kumandan Vekili Enver Pa$a tarafIndan Dahiliye NazIrI Talat Pa$a’ya bir yazI gonderilerek, Van’da ve Van Golu cevresinde Ermeniler tarafIndan yapIlan katliam sonucunda burada bulunan Ermenilerin toplu olarak buralardan cIkarIlarak isyan yuvalarInIn dagItIlmasI goru$u dile getirilmi$, isyancI Ermenilerin aileleriyle birlikte Rusya’ya veya Anadolu icerisindeki ce$itli yerlere gonderilmesini, bu iki $Iktan uygun olanInIn secilmesini istemi$tir.
Dahiliye NazIrI Talat Pa$a, durumun ciddiyeti kar$IsInda Meclis-i Vukela'dan karar almadan ve bu i$le ilgili bir gecici kanun cIkartmadan butun sorumlulugu uzerine alarak Ermeni tehcirini ba$lattI. Once Van, Bitlis ve
1-
2- Halep Vilayetinin merkez kazasI haric olmak uzere
$ugur ve
3- Mara$ $ehir merkezi haric olmak uzere Mara$ sancagI;
4-
ve Cebel-i Bereket sancaklarI.
Dogu Anadolu vilayetleriyle bazI Guney-Dogu Anadolu vilayetlerinden cIkarIlarak, Diyarbekir Vilayeti'nin guneyine, FIrat nehri vadisine ve Urfa-Suleymaniye yakInlarIna gonderilmelerine karar verilen Ermenilerin, yeniden fesat yuvalarI meydana getirmemeleri icin Ba$komutanlIk bazI uyarIlarda bulunmu$, bunun icin 26 MayIs 1915 tarihiyle Dahiliye Nezareti'ne gonderdigi bir yazIda $u hususlarIn dikkate alInmasInI istemi$tir:
1 - Ermenilerin gonderildikleri yerlerdeki nufusu oradaki a$iret ve Musluman sayIsInIn %10 nispetini gecmemelidir.
2 - Goc ettirilecek Ermenilerin kuracaklarI koylerin her biri elli evden cok olmamalIdIr.
3 - Ermeni gocmen aileleri seyahat ve nakil suretiyle de olsa ev degi$tirmemelidir.
Ermeniler konusunda Dahiliye Nezareti’nin tedbir aldIgI bir sIrada Rusya, Fransa ve ingiltere hukumetleri 24 MayIs 1915 tarihinde bir bildiri yayInlayarak, Dogu ve Guneydogu Anadolu’da Ermenilerin oldurulduklerini yayInladIlar. $imdiye kadar kI$kIrtarak destek verdikleri Ermenilerin yaptIgI katliamlarI gormezlikten gelerek, olaylardan OsmanlI Hukumetini sorumlu tutacaklarInI bildirdiler.
OlayIn milletlerarasI bir huviyet kazanmasI uzerine
Tezkirede Talat Pa$a, OsmanlI topraklarInda gozu olan dI$ guclerin Ermeniler arasIna nifak sokarak onlarI isyana sevk ettiklerini, isyan eden Ermenilerin askerlerin yanI sIra masum halka silahlI saldIrIda bulunarak onlarI katlettigini, halkIn mallarInI yagmaladIklarInI, askere erzak ve muhimmat nakline engel olduklarInI, du$mana erzak temin ettiklerini, Turk birlik ve mevzilerinin yerlerini du$mana bildirdiklerini, devletin selameti icin koklu tedbire ihtiyac duyuldugunu ve bundan dolayI, harp sahasInda olaylar cIkaran Ermenilerin ba$ka bolgelere nakline karar verildigini ifade etmektedir.
Tezkirede ayrIca Ermenilerin nerelere gonderilecegi,
Dahiliye Nezareti’nin bu tezkiresi Sadaret tarafIndan kaleme alInan 27 MayIs 1915 tarihli bir tezkire ile meclise gonderildi. Sonunda meclis tarafIndan 30 MayIs 1915 tarihinde Ermeni tehciri uygulamasInI
1 Haziran 1915 tarihinde de Takvim-i Vekayi’de yayInlanarak yururluge giren tehcirle ilgili gecici kanun $oyledir:
Madde - 1: Sefer vaktinde Ordu, Kolordu ve Tumen KomutanlarI, bunlarIn vekilleri ve Mustahkem Mevki KomutanlarI ahali tarafIndan herani bir surette hukumetin emirlerine, vatanIn mudafaasIna ve asayi$in saglanmasIna ait icraat ve tertibata kar$I gelen ve silahlI tecavuz ve direnme gorulurse, derhal askeri kuvvetlere en $iddetli surette mudahale etmeye, tecavuz ve direnmeyi esasIndan yok etmeye yetkili ve mecburdur.
Madde - 2: Ordu, Mustakil Kolordu, Tumen KomutanlarI askeri icaplara dayanan casusluk ve hainliklerini hissettikleri koy ve kasabalar ahalisini tek veya topluca diger yerlere sevk ve yerle$tirebilir. (Dikkat edilirse bu hukum sadece Ermenilere kar$I konulan bir hukum olmayIp, bu $artlara uyan herkesi kapsamaktadIr.)
Madde - 3: i$ bu kanun, yururluge girdigi (yayInlandIgI) tarihten itibaren gecerlidir.
Mehmet Re$ad 13 Recep 1333 ve 14 MayIs 1331
(27 MayIs 1915)
Sadrazam Ba$kumandanlIk Vekili ve Harbiye NazIrI
Mehmed Said Enver
ERMENi TEHCiRi (ZORUNLU GOC-YERDEGi$TiRME)
Tehcir (zorunlu goc); degi$ik tarihlerde, degi$ik uluslar tarafIndan uygulanmI$, ama hicbirinde OsmanlI da oldugu kadar haksIz bir $ekilde ele$tirilmemi$tir. 1896 yIlInda ingiltere, kendisi icin tehlikeli gordugu 2 milyon irlandalIyI Avustralya’ya surmu$tur. Yine 2. dunya harbinde Amerika, kendisi icin hicbir tehlike arz etmeyen ba$ta ABD vatanda$lIgIna gecmi$ Japonlar olmak uzere Uzak Dogu Asya ulkesi kokenli vatanda$larInI ABD’nin ic kIsImlarIna surmu$tur. Ancak gunumuzde bu surgunler hic dile getirilmedigi halde, hep OsmanlInIn tehciri one cIkarIlmI$tIr.
VatanIn her yanInda cephelerde oluk oluk Turk kanI akarken, Ermeniler; Ermenistan hayali icerisinde Gonullu AlaylarI ile Rus ve FransIz ordularInIn arkasIna takIlIp Anadolu'yu i$gale kalkmI$tIr. OsmanlI ordusundan caldIklarI silahlarla ceteler kurup, Musluman Turk koylerini yagma etmi$, yangInlar cIkarmI$, ya$lI-genc, kadIn-erkek, coluk-cocuk demeden mudafaasIz Musluman Turk halkInI en vah$i bicimde oldurmu$, can, mal ve namuslarIna tecavuz etmi$lerdir.
Rus Ordusuna yardIm icin duzenledikleri planlI isyanlar, i$gal ettikleri yerlerde Turk vatanInIn ve milletinin varlIgIna kastetmi$lerdir.
Ermeni YazarI Leo Mazl, 1915 yIlInda Tiflis'te bastIrdIgI Ermeni Sorunu Belgeleri isimli eserinde; Ermenilerin Turklere kar$I "Car Ordusu saflarIna giri$leri"ni cok guzel bir $ekilde anlatmaktadIr. Yine Ermeni yazarI Leo'ya gore Ermeni isyanlarI tehcirden once cIkarIlmI$tIr. Leo bu hususu $u sozleri ile belgelendirmektedir:
"Mu$'ta ve Mu$ OvasI'nda 7.000 Ermeni silahlandIrIlmI$tI. Bunlar koylere dagItIldIlar. BircoklarI silahlarI ile beraber Turk Ordusundan kacmI$tI. Sason (o tarihler de Bitlis ilinin bir sancagI, $imdi ise Batman ilinin bir ilcesi) ne asker vermi$ti ne de vergi. Hatta bu maksatla gonderilen Turk memurlarI da oldurulmu$lerdi. Rus Ordusu yakla$Inca Mu$ bolgesinde hazIrlanmI$ Ermeni gencleri isyan bayragInI acmaga hazIrdIlar."
Turk hukumeti i$te bu olaylar yuzunden Ermeni Tehciri’ni luzumlu gormu$tur. Tehcire tabi tutulan Ermeni sayIsInI vermeden evvel o tarihte Anadolu’da ya$ayan Ermeni nufusuna bakmakta fayda vardIr.
1910/11 nufus sayImIna gore Ermeni nufusu 1.050.513 Gregoryan, 90.050 Katolik, olarak toplam 1.140.563 ki$idir. Protestan Ermenilerin nufusu 53.880 ki$i olduguna gore toplam Ermeni nufusu 1.194.443 ki$iye ula$mI$tIr. Bu rakam 1914 sayImIna gore ise Katolik Ermeniler dahil toplam 1.229.007’dir.
Justin Mc Carthy’nin 1914 nufus istatistiginde butun OsmanlI vilayetlerinde 1.698.301 Ermeni’nin ya$adIgI hesaplanmI$tIr. Bu sayInIn genel nufusa oranI ise % 4,4 olarak gosterilmi$tir.
iyi bir ara$tIrma yapIldIgI zaman gorulecek ki 1914 yIllarInda Anadolu’da ya$ayan toplam Ermeni nufusunun 1.300.000–1.500.000 civarlarInda oldugu soylenebilir. David Magie’nin ara$tIrmalarInda toplam Ermeni nufusu 1.479.000, Mc Carthy’nin ara$tIrmasInda ise 1.698.300 olmasI, yukarIdaki 1.500.000 rakamInI dogrular niteliktedir.
Gercek olarak OsmanlI topraklarInda ya$ayan toplam Ermeni nufusu 1.229.007 ki$idir. Patrikhane kayItlarIna gore OsmanlI Ermeni nufusu toplam 1.602.000 ki$idir. Tehcir KararIndan hemen once Anadolu’da ya$ayan Ermeni nufusu 1.200.000–1.500.000 arasIdIr. Hicbir kurulu$ veya ara$tIrmacI tam rakam verememi$tir.
TEHCiRLE iLGiLi ALINAN TEDBiRLER
Kanundan hemen sonra 14 Haziran 1915 tarihinde Erzurum, DiyarbakIr, ElazIg ve Bitlis vilayetlerine gonderilen bir $ifreli yazIda, tehcir edilen Ermenilerin yollarda hayatlarInIn korunmasI, sevkIyat sIrasInda firara yeltenenlerle muhafazalarIna memur olanlara kar$I saldIrIda bulunacaklarIn yola getirilmesinin tabii oldugu, ancak buna hicbir $ekilde halkIn karI$tIrIlmamasI ve Ermenilerle Muslumanlar arasInda oldurmeye yol acacak ve aynI zamanda dI$arIya kar$I pek cirkin gorunecek olaylarIn cIkmasIna kesinlikle fIrsat verilmemesi istenmi$ti.
Yeni iskan sahalarIna dagItIlacak olan Ermeniler Konya, Cizre,
OsmanlI Hukumeti sava$ $artlarIna ragmen, sevkIyatIn bir duzen icerisinde yurumesine ve kafilelerin herhangi bir zarara ugramamasIna itina gostermi$, bunun icin elindeki butun imkanlarI zorlamI$tIr. Bu sevkIyat esnasInda gorulen en buyuk zorluk, vasIta sIkIntIsI olmu$tur. Gerek sava$ nedeniyle surekli cephelere muhimmat ta$InmasI ve gerekse hasat mevsimi olmasI, araba ve hayvanlara duyulan ihtiyac yuzunden kafilelerin zorluk cektigi gorulmu$tur.
Butun bu zor $artlara ragmen OsmanlI Hukumeti, tehcire tabi tutulan Ermenileri buyuk bir intizam icerisinde yeni yerle$im alanlarIna sevk etmi$tir. Amerika’nIn Mersin Konsolosu Edward Natan, 30 Agustos 1915 tarihinde Buyukelci Hanry Morgenthau’ya gonderdigi raporda bu durumu acIkca belirtmektedir. Raporda, Tarsus’tan Adana’ya kadar butun hat guzergahInIn Ermenilerle dolu oldugunu ve Adana’dan itibaren bilet alarak trenle seyahat ettiklerini, kalabalIk yuzunden sefalet ve cektikleri zahmete ragmen hukumetin bu i$i son derece intizamlI bir $ekilde idare etmekte oldugunu, $iddete ve intizamsIzlIga yer vermedigini, gocmenlere yeterli kadar bilet saglandIgInI, muhtac olanlara yardImda bulundugunu belirtmi$tir.
Zorunlu goc sIrasInda butun yokluklara ragmen Ermenilerin zorunlu gocu icin OsmanlI Devleti milyonlarca kuru$ harcamaktan cekinmemi$tir. Tehcir uygulamasI konusunda yaptIgI doktora tezinde ara$tIrmacI Bulent Bakar, yapIlan tahsisatI yIl yIl belgelemi$tir. Halacoglu’nIn iskan-I A$air ve Muhacirin Muduriyetinin 1915 yIlI butcesinden ozetledigi rakamlara gore de kafilelerin ihtiyaclarI icin Konya’ya 400.000, izmit’e 150.000, Eski$ehir’e 200.000, Adana’ya 300.000, Halep’e 300.000, Suriye’ye 100.000, Ankara’ya 300.000, Musul’a 500.000 kuru$ olmak uzere toplam 2.250.000 kuru$ odenek ayIrmI$tIr.
TEHCiRLE iLGiLi GELi$MELER
istanbul’daki Alman Buyukelci Vekili Neurath, 26 Haziran 1915 tarihli raporunda tehcirle ilgili goru$unu $oyle belirtmektedir: “Turk hukumeti, Dogu Anadolu’daki Ermeni halkInI, yogun oldugu eyaletlerde isyan cIkarmalarInI engellemek icin askeri nedenlerden dolayI surgun etmi$tir” Ermenilerin o zamana kadar yuruttukleri faaliyetler ve kendi ulkelerine kar$I olan dI$ guclerle i$birligi yapmalarI, tehcir kararInI mecbur kIlmI$tIr.
Tehcir sonrasI batI basInI her zaman oldugu gibi yine feryatlar koparmaya ba$lamI$, olaylarI oldugundan farklI gostererek OsmanlI Hukumeti ve Turk milleti haksIz olarak itham edilmi$tir. Amerika, Rusya, ingiltere gibi devletler ile batIlI devletlerin basInI olaylarI hic ara$tIrmadan, incelemeden tamamen taraflI ve kasItlI olarak aleyhimize kullanmI$lardIr. YukarIda belirttigim Amerika’nIn Mersin Konsolosu Edward Natan’In istanbul’daki Amerika Buyukelcisi Hanry Morgenthau’ya gonderdigi rapor, buyukelci tarafIndan tamamen ters $ekilde ulkesine bildirilmi$tir. Bu buyukelcinin taraflI, yanlI$, asIlsIz ve kasItlI olarak Amerika’ya gonderdigi raporlar, Amerika basInI tarafIndan Turkler aleyhine kullanIlmI$tIr.
ABD Ba$kanI Wilson’un, Amerika’nIn sava$a katIlImInI me$rula$tIracak ve bunu icin kamuoyu olu$turacak bir takIm olaylarIn bulunmasI talimatI (gunumuzde Irak’ta oldugu gibi) dogrultusunda, o sIrada OsmanlI nezdinde Buyukelci olan Henry Morgenthau Ermeni tehciri meselesini ele almI$tIr. Morgenthau, ezilmekte ve yok edilmekte olan mazlum bir HIristiyan millet olarak degerlendirdigi Ermenilerle ilgili geli$meleri ve Ermenilerin zorunlu gocu sIrasInda meydana gelen bazI olum olaylarInI, cok ba$arIlI bir katliam propagandasIna donu$turmu$tur. Morgenthau’nun esas raporlarIyla acIk celi$kiler ta$Iyan bir senaryo, Buyukelcinin danI$manI ve tercumanI olan Turk Ermenisi Arshag K. Schmavonian, gazeteci Burton J. Hendrick ve Amerika DI$i$leri BakanI Robert Lansing tarafIndan hazIrlanmI$ ve Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story” adIyla 1918 yIlInda New York’ta yayInlanmI$tIr.
Bu propaganda kervanIna buyuk capta bilgileri yine Morgenthau’dan alan Lord James Bryce, olaylara uzak olan Alman Protestan papazI Johannes Lepsius ve o sIralarda genc bir tarihci olan Arnold Toynbee de katIlmI$tIr. Kamuoyu olu$turmada onemli bir rol oynayacak olan Arnold Toynbee, ingiliz DI$i$leri BakanlIgI Sava$ Propaganda Burosu’nda gorevlendirilmi$ ve Turkiye aleyhindeki sava$ kampanyasInda on sIralarda yer almI$tIr. HazIrladIgI propaganda kitapcIklarInda OsmanlI ulkesinde bulundugu iddia edilen 1.800.000 Ermeni’den 1,5 milyonuna yakInInIn katledildigi tezini ilk olarak o ortaya atmI$tIr. Bu turden propaganda yayInlarI daha sonraki yIllarda ciddi ba$vuru kaynaklarI huviyetinde i$lem gormu$tur.
Robert Farrer Zeidner, 1957 Haziran ayInda Beyrut’ta unlu tarihci Arnold Toynbee’e kendi imzasIyla yayInlanan, The Armenian Atrocities (London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1915) Turkey: A Past and A Future (New York, Geo. H. Doran, 1917) ile The Treatment of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire 1915–16 (London, HMSO, 1916) adlI kitaplarI hakkIndaki goru$unu sordugunda Toynbee’nin buyuk bir mahcubiyetle, bu erken donem calI$malarIn tumuyle birer sava$ propagandasI oldugunu ifade ettigini ve bundan buyuk bir uzuntu duydugunu bildirmektedir.
SOYKIRIM iDDiALARI
Ermeni konularInda bir uzman olan ve yazdIgI “Ermeni DosyasI” isimli eseri Turkce, ingilizce ve FransIzca olarak basIlan emekli Buyukelci Kamuran Gurun: “OsmanlI Ar$ivlerinde 1912’de ulkemiz sInIrlarI icerisindeki toplam Ermeni sayIsInIn 1.300.000.000, 1921’de ise 1.025.000.000 olduguna gore I. Dunya Sava$I sonunda Ermeni sayIsInda 300.000’e yakIn bir azalma olmu$tur. Muslumanlardan aynI donemde 2 milyon bir azalma oldugu bunlardan ¼’unun cephede $ehit du$tugunu” belirtmi$tir.
Kamuran Gurun yaptIgI incelemelerinde $u hususlarI bildirmektedir: “Sevr anla$masInI Ermeniler imzalamI$tIr. Tehcir kararI bir katliam kararI degildir. Devletin bunun aksine goce tabi olanlarIn korunmasI talimatlarI var. Sorumlular mahkemelere verilecek denilmektedir. Nitekim bunlara aykIrI hareket
Sadrazam Tevfik Pa$a bu katliam meselesini ve iddiasInI incelemek uzere birinci dunya sava$Ina girmemi$ tarafsIz Danimarka, ispanya, isvec gibi ulkelerden iki$er uzman istemi$tir. Fakat ingiltere buna mani olmu$tur. 144 ki$i olaylarla ilgili olarak Malta’ya surulmu$tur.
Mara$’ta 2 bin Ermeni’nin oldugu soylenmektedir. ZamanIn ingiltere DI$i$leri BakanI Lord Curzon bu sayIyI 20 bine, daha sonralarI ise 70 bine cIkarmI$tIr.
Sevr muzakerelerindeki Ermeni delegasyonu ba$kanI Bogos Nubar Pa$a “gocte 260.000 ki$i yerlerine varmadI” diye yazmI$tI. Ancak bu ki$iler hakkInda katliam iddiasInda bulunmamI$tIr. Turkler oldurdu diyememi$tir.”
Bu konu ile ilgili olarak Prof. Dr. Stamford Shaw $unu soylemektedir:
“OsmanlIlarIn 1,5 milyon Ermeni’yi sistematik olarak soykIrIma tabi tuttuklarI iddiasI, 20. yuzyIlIn en abartIlI aldatmacasIdIr. Hitler’in gercek Yahudi soykIrImIna golge du$urmektedir.”
ingiliz tarihcisi Dr. Andrev Mango; TBMM tarafIndan duzenlenen “Tarih Boyunca Turk-Ermeni ili$kileri” konulu sempozyuma gonderdigi tebligde $u bilgilere yer vermektedir:
“Ataturk; Cumhuriyetin kurulmasIyla beraber gecmi$le ilgili hesaplarI kapattI. Ermeniler ise bunun tersine ve gecmi$i tarihcilere bIrakmak yerine intikamcI bir yol izleyerek toprak ve tazminat taleplerini gundeme getirmeye
OsmanlI imparatorlugu’nda Ermeni nufusunun yogun oldugu altI vilayette bile (Vilayet-i Site:
OsmanlI ar$ivindeki belgelere gore 448.000 Ermeni icin tehcir kararI verilmi$, bunlardan 382.000 ki$inin yerine ula$tIgI, geri kalanlarIn ise yolda hastalIktan, ya$lIlIktan ve cetelerin baskInInda oldugu anla$IlmI$tIr. (Prof. Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu 438.758 Ermeni’nin sevk edildigini, bunlardan 382.148 ki$inin yerlerine vardIgInI bildirmektedir).
BatIlI tarihcilere gore tehcir esnasInda hastalIk, aclIk, salgIn hastalIklar, a$iret kavgalarI, kItlIk, hava $artlarI ile 300 bin Ermeni olmu$tur. Ama soykIrIm yapIlmamI$tIr. 2 milyon insan ise asla degildir. Hatta 300 bin rakamInI bile abartmI$lardIr. Tarihci Prof. Dr. Stanford Shaw’a gore olenlerin sayIsI 200 bindir. ingiliz gizli servis mensubu Toynbee bu sayIyI 600 bine cIkarmI$tIr. Tarihcilere gore tehcir dahil Birinci Dunya Sava$Inda olen butun Ermenilerin sayIsI toplam 200–300 bindir (AslInda olen Ermeni sayIsI 60–65 bin civarIndadIr. 200.000 binden fazla Ermeni, RuslarIn, 40 bin civarInda Ermeni ise FransIzlarIn safInda OsmanlI’ya kar$I sava$Irken olmu$tur. BunlarI da ekledigimiz zaman 300.000 rakamIna ula$IlIr).
3 ingiliz generalinin hazIrladIgI raporda ise Ermenilerin bir milyon Turk’u katlettigi yer alIr. CarlIk Rusya’sInIn DI$i$leri BakanI Sazanoff’un, Car vekili Nikolayevic’e 27 Haziran 916’da yolladIgI telgrafta: “Ermenilerin Dogu Anadolu’da hicbir zaman cogunlukta olmadIgInI, cogunlugun her zaman Turklerde bulundugunu, bu $artlar altInda bir Ermenistan muhtariyetinin kurulmasI, azInlIgIn cogunlugu idare etmesi bir haksIzlIk olacaktIr.” demektedir.
AynI yazar bir ba$ka yazIsInda: “Ermeni cetelerinin tehcirden once 1 milyon Musluman Turk’u katlettigini, ingiliz generali Harbord Harington ile De Robeck hazIrladIklarI raporda ifade etmektedirler.
1932’den bu yana 3006 yabancI tarihci ve uzman, OsmanlI ar$ivlerini incelemi$ ve soykIrIm ile ilgili hicbir belge bulamamI$lardIr. OsmanlI Ar$ivi Daire Ba$kanlIgI tarafIndan hazIrlanan ve ne$redilen – Ar$iv Belgelerine Gore Kafkaslarda ve Anadolu’da Ermeni Mezalimi – isimli 4 ciltlik eserde 1914–1921 yIllarI arasInda Ermenilerin katlettigi 517.955 ki$iye ait belgeler, yerleri, tarih ve cinayetin nasIl i$lendigi resmi kayItlarla sabittir. Buna Anadolu’nun diger yerlerindeki katliamlar eklendiginde ingiliz generallerinin 1 milyon Turk’un katli raporu dogrulanmaktadIr.”
1982 yIlInda Munih’te “Dunyadaki Ermenilerin SorunlarI Kongresi”nde konu$an Ermeni Profesor Hovannisian, $u gercegi itiraf etmektedir. “Ermeni soykIrImI ispatlanamamI$tIr. SoykIrIm hukuken gecersizdir. Ve zaten zaman a$ImIna da ugramI$tIr”
$imdi iyice du$unmek gerekiyor. Musluman Turk Milleti Anadolu’ya girdigi 1038 tarihinden Kurtulu$
SoykIrIm duzmecesi, HIristiyan dunyasInIn uydurdugu koca bir yalandan ibarettir. Bu yalanIn arkasInda duran batIlI gucler, bu yuce millete olan kinlerini ve bu topraklar uzerinde besledikleri gizli emellerini bu $ekilde dile getirmektedirler. Rusya’nIn bogazlara kavu$ma sevdasI, ingilizlerin 3B siyaseti, Fransa’nIn Akdeniz bolgesindeki bitmez arzularI, Amerika’nIn israil ile Ermenistan’I birle$tirecek bir koridor acma ve Orta Dogu hedefleri, YunanlIlarIn Megalo ideasI ve benzeri cIkarlar.
Gercekten boyle bir soykIrIm olmadIgInI batIlI devletler cok iyi bilmektedirler. Ama onlar milli dI$ politikalarInI Turk du$manlIgI uzerine kurmu$lardIr. AsIrlardIr sure gelen “islam’I dogdugu Arap collerinde bogma, Turkleri geldikleri Asya steplerine surme” hayalleri, gunumuzde de olanca varlIgIyla surmektedir.
SoykIrIm yalanI ilk defa ingilizler tarafIndan ortaya atIlmI$tIr. Ermenilerin savundugu soykIrIm masalI; James Bryce ve Arnold Toynbee tarafIndan yazIlan Blue Book (Mavi Kitap) isimli esere dayanmaktadIr. Bu kitap aslInda ingiliz istihbaratInIn yalan haber uretme makinesinin bir urunudur. Birinci Dunya Sava$I sIrasInda gerek Almanya’ya gerekse OsmanlI Hukumeti’ne kar$I yalan ve karalama kampanyasI yuruten ve bu amacla ingiltere’de Wellington House’de ozel bir
AmerikalI tarihci ve OsmanlI UzmanI Prof. Justin Mc. Carthy, bir sure once Londra’da SOAS’ta (
“Birinci Dunya Sava$I patlak verdiginde Wellington House’de gizli bir propaganda birimi kuruldu (2 Eylul 1914-Z.A). Bu birimin amacI, ingiltere’nin du$manlarInI karalamak, Amerika nezdinde ingiliz goru$une destek saglayabilmek ve ingiltere’de sava$ sIrasInda moralleri yuksek tutmaktI. Wellington House’deki birimin ba$Inda Charles Masterman adlI bir Liberal Milletvekili vardI. Llyod George’un (David, ingiltere Maliye BakanI) cok yakIn bir danI$manIydI. Bu buroda
Her yIl 24 Nisan’da Ermeniler tarafIndan sozde soykIrIm gunu kutlanmaktadIr. 24 Nisan 1915 tarihinde Ermenilerin soykIrIma ugradIklarI dile getirilmektedir. Gercekte 24 Nisan 1915 tarihinde tek bir Ermeni dahi olmemi$tir. 23 Nisan’I 24 Nisan’a baglayan ak$amI, guvenlik gucleri Ermeni Komite merkezlerine baskIn yaparak ihtilal hareketi icerisinde olan 2345 ihtilalci Ermeniyi tutuklamI$ ve komite merkezlerini kapatmI$tIr. isyan planlarInIn suya du$tugunu goren Ecmiyazin (uc kilise/Ermenistan) kilisesi Ba$piskoposu Kework, ABD Devlet Ba$kanI Wilson’a bir telgraf gondererek; “HIristiyan Ermenilerin Turkler tarafIndan katledildigi”ni bildirmi$tir. O gunden bu yana 24 Nisan tarihi Ermeniler tarafIndan asIlsIz soykIrIm tarihi olarak kutlanmaya ba$lanmI$tIr. Oysa bu tarihte tek bir Ermeni olmemi$, asIlsIz bir soykIrIm ise hic ya$anmamI$tIr.
Butun bu gerceklere ragmen asIlsIz soykIrIm iddialarI hala gundemde, hala tazeligini korumaktadIr. 2006 yIlI icerisinde Polonya, Almanya ve Arjantin’le beraber bazI ABD eyaletleri asIlsIz soykIrIm iddialarInI
BIrakIn 90 yIl once cereyan
Bizler istedigimiz kadar asIlsIz soykIrIm iddialarI gerceklerden uzak, propaganda gayeli, batIlI ulkeler bu kararI siyasi olarak alIyor, bu i$i tarihcilere bIrakalIm, gelin birlikte ara$tIralIm desek de sonuc degi$meyecektir. Bu devletler ilmi olarak degil, siyasi olarak kararlarInI coktan vermi$lerdir. istedigimiz kadar ar$ivlerimizi acalIm, ba$ta Ermeniler olmak uzere hic kimse buna yana$mayacaktIr. Biz tarihimizden, ar$ivlerimizden sonuna kadar eminiz. Tarihimizle yuzle$meye hazIrIz. O zaman yapIlacak i$ nedir? YapIlacak $udur:
Turkiye Buyuk Millet Meclisi’nin bir karar alarak bu meseleyi Birle$mi$ Milletlere ta$ImasI gerekir. NasIl ki 1918 yIlInda OsmanlI devleti sava$a taraf olmayan ispanya, Danimarka gibi ulkelerden bagImsIz bir komisyon kurulmasInI istediyse, aynI ba$vuruyu BM’ye yapmasI gerekir. TaraflI ve tarafsIz ulkelerden bagImsIz bir komisyon kurulmasInI talep etmelidir. Tarihcilerden, Hukukculardan, Ekonomistlerden, Sosyolog ve dil bilimcilerden kurulu bir komisyon kurulmasInI istemelidir. Bu komisyon butun ar$ivleri; OsmanlI Ar$ivi, Rus, Alman, FransIz, ingiliz ve ozellikle Ermenistan’daki ar$ivleri incelemelidir. Bu incelemeyi yapabilmesi icin de Erivan’daki soykIrIm Ar$ivi’nin, Kudus ve Lubnan ar$ivleriyle ABD’nin Boston’daki Ta$naklara ait Zoryan Ar$ivi’nin acIlmasI gerekir. Butun bu ar$ivlerde onyargIsIz ara$tIrma yapIlmasI, cIkacak sonuca butun ulkelerin razI olmasI gerekir. Aksi takdirde Turkiye Cumhuriyeti Devleti’nin gunluk kararlarIyla bu mesele uzayIp gidecek, asIlsIz soykIrImI
BiBLiYOGRAFYA
1. ALTUG YIlmaz, “Tarih Boyunca Turk-Ermeni ili$kileri”, Turkiye Gazetesi, 23 Nisan 2001, s. 9
2. BAYUR Yusuf Hikmet, Turk inkIlabI Tarihi, iii/3,
3. GURUN Kamuran, Ermeni dosyasI, Ankara 1983, s. 213
4. HALACOGLU Prof. Dr. Yusuf, Ermeni Tehciri ve Gercekler (1914-1918), Turk Tarih Kurumu, Turk Tarih
Kurumu BasImevi, Ankara 2001, sah. 47
5. Hikmet OZDEMiR, Kemal CiCEK, Omer TURAN, Ramazan CALIK Yusuf HALACOGLU, Ermeniler:
Surgun ve GOC, Turk Tarih Kurumu, Turk Tarih Kurumu BasImevi, Ankara 2004,
6. James Bryce-Arnold Toynbee, OsmanlI imparatorlugu’nda Ermenilere Yonelik Muamele, 1915-1916, Cilt 1,
Pencere YayInlarI,
7. Justin Mc Carty, Muslim and Minorites. s. 112
8. KANTARCI Dr .$enol, Birinci Dunya Sava$I'nIn Oteki Yuzu; Ordinaryus Prof. Dr. Tevfik Saglam’In "Buyuk Harpte 3. Orduda SIhhî Hizmet istanbul 9. Meclis-i Vukela MazbatasI, Defter nr. 198, Karar sIra no. 163
10. OZFATURA M. Necati, “Esas SoykIrImI Ermeniler YaptI”, Turkiye Gazetesi, 22 Mart 2001, s. 9
11. Sadrazam Talat Pa$a'nIn defteri, Murat BardakcI, Hurriyet Gazetesi, 26.04.2006
12. SERDAR M. Torehan, Ermeni Tehciri ve SoykIrIm iddialarI, Ugurel MatbaasI, Malatya 2004, sah. 1
13. $FR. Nr. 59/244
14. $FR. Nr. 56/149; 55-A/73; nr. 54-A/248
15. Takvim-i Vekayi, nr. 2189, 18 Recep 1333 ve 19 MayIs 1331 (1 Haziran 1915)
16. URAS Esat, Tarihte Ermeniler ve Ermeni Meselesi, Belge YayInlarI,
17. YUCEER Saime, “Birinci Dunya sava$I ve Kurtulu$ SavasI YIllarInda Bursa Ermenileri”, Ermeni Sorunu ve
Bursa Ermenileri, Bursa 2000, s. 70-71
AVUSTURALYADAN BIR MEKTUP
Fallacious Armenian Genocide allegations.
From: Ataman Atlas [mailto:atamanatlas@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 9:48 AM
To: Kaya Buyukataman; Turkish Consulate Sydney
Subject: RE: Peter Balakian's Conference and the Fallacious Armenian Genocide allegations.
(The below letter is directed at Mr Hartcher and Australian Politicians in general, I have copied others in for their information and dissemination to the relevant authorities and organisations).
Dear Mr Hartcher, and Ladies and Gentlemen;
I write to you in respect of last night’s Armenian conference held at the UTS Campus in Linfield the keynote speaker being one Mr Peter Balakian. Firstly, I would like to make you aware that I was in attendance at the conference in company with other members of the Australian Turkish Community as was Professor Turkkaya Ataov from the
The first point that I would like to make clear is that as Australian citizens of Turkish origin we are fully aware and expect defamatory and derogatory comments from the Armenian Diaspora, we have become accustomed to this as well much more severe actions such as acts of terrorism from Armenians. Let me remind you now of the murders of Mr Sarik Arayak and Engin Sever in
However, what has disappointed and angered us more is the comments and attitude displayed by various Australian Politicians in particular Mr Hartcher. Let me qualify that statement for you. Mr Hartcher made light of the fact that a former Consul General from
Further, Mr Hartcher also referred to the forged, false, and deceptive “Hitler Quote”. Armenians still continually use this alleged quote and other proven forgeries in order to support their spurious claims. Men and women with less then average intellect and no inquiring minds have fallen hook, line and sinker for these deceptive and manipulative arguments, as is the case with Mr Hartcher.
Much innocent blood has been spilt over the Armenian aspirations of a larger and Great Armenia for decades, in fact spilt on the streets of
It is no wonder that Turks and in fact the vast majority of Muslims feel marginalised and disenfranchised as a result of such conduct by the likes of Mr Hartcher. We in
Mr Hartcher’s conduct and comments only go to re – enforce long held hatred and stereotypes. It appears that the mentality first conjured up by Pope Urban in the first Crusades still continues to this date here in Australia in the 21st Century. That is the picture of the “Bad Turk”.
As members of the Australian Turkish Community will no longer sit back and take such unwarranted, deceptive, derogatory, defamatory, heinous allegations and attacks, we have arranged for Prof Turkkaya Ataov to attend
Last nights highly entertaining, fictitious ceremony and conference did not ONCE mention the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF TURKS that were butchered by the Armenian citizens of the
With the ANZAC day ceremonies about to commence here and in
Those of you that wish to attend Prof Ataov’s conference to ask questions and “Cross Examine” the good Professor please contact me so I can arrange invites to be sent out to you. Not that I expect any of you will attend after all we are only Turks less than human isn’t that right Mr Hartcher. You see Mr Hartcher I do not wish for death to be visited upon you, NO on the contrary I wish for death to be visited upon your dearest and most loved and for you to suffer in misery in a long life, like Mr Arayak’s widow and daughter, like Mr Sever’s elderly parents his uncles aunts and cousins. Then for you to attend a conference so that someone can make a joke about their death.
I do not expect a reply from any of you however; I will give you a glimpse of the evidence available against the fallacious Armenian genocide claims from mostly neutral non-Turkish sources.
What the Armenian citizens of the former Ottoman Empire could not achieve (that is their aspiration of a Greater Armenia) with acts of WAR, WAR CRIMES, ATROCITIES and TERRORISM they are now trying to achieve via unscrupulous sociopathic politicians (like Mr Hartcher) and his politics.
Regards
Ataman Atlas
Quotes and References
"(The) United Nations has not approved or endorsed a
Report labelling the Armenian experience as Genocide."
Farhan Haq, U.N. spokesman, October 5th, 2000. On June 4-7, 2005, at a
officially recognized the genocide, he was not allowed to call it that." As reader Conan put it: "The UN is the organ that has established the Genocide Convention. If even such an institution doesn’t recognize the Armenian genocide,
In Demirian (1988) 33 A Crim R 441, the Court of Criminal Appeal in Victoria heard, inter alia, an application for leave to appeal against the sentence imposed on Demirian for conspiracy to cause an explosion likely to endanger life or cause serious injury arising out of an incident at the Turkish Consulate in Melbourne, in 1986.
53 On a Sunday in November of that year, a large bomb which had been placed in the rear of a Holden Torana, exploded in the car park below a building at 44 Caroline Street, South Yarra, causing very substantial damage to that building and to other premises in the vicinity.
54 After the explosion, human remains were found close to the vehicle. It emerged from a detailed scientific investigation that a man had probably been standing alongside the driver's door when the bomb exploded, apparently, prematurely.
55 Demirian was charged with conspiracy and with the murder of the deceased. The Crown case was that Demirian was a party to the agreement with the deceased, and perhaps others, to place and explode the bomb so that it would blow up the building containing the Turkish Consulate.
56 Demirian was convicted of both conspiracy and murder. On appeal, the conviction for conspiracy was upheld and that for murder was quashed. The only remaining issue was whether the sentence imposed on Demirian for the conspiracy was excessive: a sentence of 10 years' imprisonment, with no minimum term.
57 In a joint judgment, McGarvie and O'Bryan JJ said:
“The type of activity engaged in by the applicant and others is rare in this country but terrorist acts are commonplace in the country from whence the applicant emigrated to
When a crime of such notoriety and heinousness is committed in the name of a political cause this Court is not required to fix a minimum term. The political nature of the offence and its seriousness render the fixing of such a term inappropriate. A sentence imposed in these circumstances should be exceptional to mark the seriousness with which the crime is viewed and therefore no minimum term should be fixed.” (1988 33 A Crim R at p 474)
58 Tadgell J agreed, in relation to that aspect of the appeal (at p 481).
59 The maximum penalty for the offence of which Demirian was convicted was 15 years' imprisonment. The sentence imposed on him was therefore two-thirds of the maximum.
"I have it from absolute first-hand information that the
Armenians in the
that are utterly defenseless and bombarded these villages
with artillery and they murder the inhabitants, pillage the
village and often burn the village."
Admiral Mark Bristol,
"The Moslems who did not succeed in escaping [the city] were put to death..."
Grace H. Knapp, The Tragedy of Bitlis, Fleming H. Revell Co.,
"We closed the roads and mountain passes that might serve as ways of escape for the Tartars (Turks), and then proceeded in the work of extermination. Our troops surrounded village after village. Little resistance was offered. Our artillery knocked the huts into heaps of stones and dust, and when the villages became untenable and the inhabitants fled from them into the fields, bullets and bayonets completed the work."
Ohanus Appressian, describing incidents in 1919; Memoirs of an Armenian officer, Men are Like That, 1926.
"This three-day massacre by Armenians is recorded in history as the 'March Events' and thousands of Muslims, old people, women and children lost their lives."
F. Kazemzadeh, The Struggle for
" All Turkish children also should be killed as they form a danger to the Armenian nation"
Hamparsum Boyaciyan, nicknamed "Murad," a former Ottoman parliamentarian who led Armenian guerilla forces, ravaging Turkish villages behind the lines, 1914. Cited from Mikael Varandean, "History of the Dashnaktsutiun." (Alternately known as "History of the A.R.Federation" ["H. H. Dashnaktsutyan Patmutiwn,"
"I killed Muslims by every means possible. Yet it is sometimes a pity to waste bullets for this. The best way is to gather all of these dogs and throw them into wells and then fill the wells with big and heavy stones. as I did. I gathered all of the women, men and children, threw big stones down on top of them. They must never live on this earth."
A. Lalayan, Revolutsionniy Vostok (Revolutionary East) No: 2-3,
"When we arrived at Zeve, the village couldn't be passed through because of its stench. It was as if the bones in our noses would fall off... There were bodies everywhere. We saw a weird scene on the threshold of one house: they had filled the house with Muslims and burned it, and so many people had been burnt that the fat that had oozed from under the threshold had turned back into the trench in front of the door. That is, it was as if the river of fat had risen and later receded. The fat was still fresh. The entire village had been destroyed and was in this situation. I saw this with my own eyes, and I'll never forget it. We heard that they did the same thing to the Muslims on
Haci Osman Gemicioglu, an Armenian-Turk (having converted to Islam) who eyewitnessed the 1915 Zeve massacre; as told to Huseyin Celik, during interviews conducted in the late 1970s-early 80s.
"Only 1,500 Turks remain in Van"
The Gochnag, an Armenian newspaper published in the United States, May 24,1915 ... in a proud report documenting the slaughter of the Turkish citizenry of Van.
"Many massacres were committed by the Armenians until our army arrived in
Official telegram of the Third Royal Army Command, addressed to the Supreme Command, March 19, 1918; ATASE Archive of General Staff, Archive No: 4-36-71. D. 231. G.2. K. 2820. Dos.A-69, Fih.3.
"There is little news from the interior save that the Russians have entered Van. The contingent is mostly composed of Armenian volunteers who fight with desperate courage, but whose excesses have shocked even the Russian commanders."
Lewis Einstein, "Inside Constantinople – A [Diplomat's] Diary During the
"The Armenians did exterminate the entire Muslim population of Russian
Mikael Kaprilian, Armenian revolutionary leader, in Yerevan, 1919.
"In Soviet
Sahak Melkonian, Preserving the Armenian Purity, 1920
"Since all the able Moslem men were in the army, it was easy for the Armenians to begin a horrible slaughter of the defenseless Moslem inhabitants in the area. They ... simply cleaned out the Moslem inhabitants in those areas. They performed gruesome deeds, of which I, as an eye witness honestly say that they were much worse than what Turks have been accused of as an Armenian atrocity."
General Bronsart von Schellendorf , "A Witness for Talat Pasha," Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, July 24, 1921
"The Dashnaks and Hunchaks have terrorized their own countrymen, they have stirred up the Muslim people with their thefts and insanities, and have paralyzed all efforts made to carry out reforms; all the events that have taken place in Anatolia are the responsibility of the crimes committed by the Armenian revolutionary committees."
Williams, The British vice-consul, writing from Van. (March 4, 1896, British Blue Book, Nr. 8 1896, p.108.)
"The Turks and Armenians got on excellently together... The Russians restricted the Armenian Church, schools and language; the Turks on the contrary were perfectly tolerant and liberal as to all such matters. They did not care how the Armenians prayed, taught and talked... The Armenians were thorough Orientals and appreciated Turkish ideas and habits... (They) were quite content to live among the Turks.... The balance of wealth certainly remained with the Christians. The Turks treated them with good-humoured confidence..."
Sir Charles Eliot, author, "
(The religious toleration of the Ottoman Government) "was complete" (and the state) "never in any way interfered with what the Christians did or taught in the schools or the churches.... it was impossible to desire more absolute liberty of worship or teaching."
Gratan Geary, "Through Asiatic
"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"
Voltaire
"The Armenians of
Hadisian, Foreign Minister of the Armenian Republic, upon the signing of the Batum Treaty on June 4, 1918 with the Ottoman Government. (Only seven days after the
"The Osmanli (Ottoman) has yet to be heard." (The English have) "heard stories ad nauseam of massacres, of pillages, of the ravishing of women, but none of these stories have been corroborated by a single European eyewitness."
Captain Charles Boswell Norman, "The Armenians Unmasked" (1895)
"...In the absence of unequivocal evidence that the Ottoman administration took a specific decision to eliminate the Armenians under their control at that time, British governments have not recognized those events as indications of genocide... Nor do we believe it is the business of governments of today to review events of over 80 years ago, with a view to pronouncing on them..."
Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale, Foreign Office spokesperson, on April 14, 1999; the PA News from London... reporting on yet another Armenian bid to get the British Government to recognize its "genocide."
"The Turkish government felt that pressing the Turkish case against Armenians and others would rekindle old hatreds and invite war, so the Turks said nothing of their grievances. This was the right decision for the time. The unfortunate result was that no one spoke for the Turks"
Justin McCarthy, Professor, University of Louisville, testifying at the Congressional Hearing on H. Res. 398 in 2000.
“The acts of the Armenian army at
"The pride of race brings about many singularities and prompts the Armenians to prey on missionaries, Jesuits, consuls and European traveler with rapacity and ingratitude. The poor Armenians will demand assistance in a loud tone, yet will seldom give thanks for a donation. Abuse of Consular officers and missionaries is only a part of the stock-in-trade of the extra-Armenian press." — Mark Sykes, "The Caliph’s Last Heritage" (
"The Turks marched into
"...The Turkish forces were far inferior to the Armenians, but the latter put up no fight and ran away in the most cowardly manner. The soldiers threw away their guns, stripped off their equipment, and hid in the hospitals and orphanages belonging to the Near East Relief Committee when the Turks entered
“We reject attempts to create a similarity between the Holocaust and the Armenian allegations. Nothing similar to the Holocaust occurred. It is a tragedy what the Armenians went through, but not a genocide. (Nobel prize of Peace and Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres (Turkish Daily News, April 10, 2001))
“The British government of that time and those that followed considered the massacres of 1915-1916 as a horrifying tragedy. We understand the force of feelings for this problem, given the human losses of both parties. But we do not believe that proofs put forward give evidence that those events must be classified as “genocide” as defined by the Convention of the United Nations on the genocide of 1948. The events of 1915-1916 constitute a big tragedy, during which two parts underwent very heavy losses.” (Statement of the Embassy of
Turks enjoy a long history of friendship by living in harmony with different ethnic groups and sharing a geographic and cultural heritage.” (Decree of Court of Common Council of the City of
“We recognize millions of citizens of the
(…)We share the Turkish Americans’ great burden of sorrow from the tragic events which befell their ancestors from 1912-1922. (…)Whereas, recognition of the Turkish tragedy is crucial to ensuring against the repetition of future civilian wartime tragedies. (Decree of the State of
“It is unacceptable to make a comparison between the Holocaust and the tragedy lived by the Armenian people. Holocaust is a unique phenomenon, because it was planned and aimed at the extermination of a whole nation.” (Rivka Cohen, ambassadress of
“I’m here in
October 18, 2007 6:30 AM
History Speaks
The moral case against the Armenian Genocide resolution.
By Barbara Lerner
Prudential arguments against the Armenian genocide resolution pending in Congress are gaining traction; odds for passage in November that looked overwhelming last month look more like a toss-up today. But in the court of public opinion, genocide proponents are still winning. Most Europeans and transcultural multinationals have already proclaimed it an indisputable historical fact that the Armenian tragedy in Turkey in World War I was a genocide, perpetrated by the Turks — a deliberate government attempt to wipe out all Armenians — and growing numbers of Americans think we have a moral duty to join them. The problem, in this arena, is that prudential arguments have nothing like the emotional power and widespread popular appeal of the moral case for condemning the Turks.
We must do it, Armenian genocide proponents tell us, because the Armenian tragedy was the original Holocaust: Armenians in World War I were like the Jews in World War II; Turks in 1915 were like the Germans in the 1940s. Thus, the only moral choice is to condemn the Turks, as we condemned the Nazis. The logic here is inescapable: it is the only moral choice, if the charge is true, if Armenians really were helpless scapegoats like the Jews, and if Turks really were deliberate, genocidal monsters like the Nazis. But an analogy is only an emotional appeal, not a rational argument — let alone a moral one — — unless it actually fits the historical facts. To judge whether the Holocaust analogy does, we can’t just look at Jews and Germans in World War II, then at dead Armenians in World War I, and extrapolate the rest. We have to look at live Armenians and Turks in 1915; at the desperate, multi-front war
We know what life was like for ordinary people and government leaders in
In all these lost lands, Turks and other Muslims had been at least a substantial minority; in many, a clear majority, and everywhere, they were driven from their homes in large numbers, and often brutalized. Massacres and rapes were especially common on the eastern front. Czarist troops and their local allies were no less brutal to conquered Muslim civilians than their Communist successors were to Christian civilians in the
That’s the backdrop to 1915. Here’s the foreground. In January, the French, the British, and Britain’s colonial troops — Australians and New Zealanders—mounted a major attack on Turkey’s western front at Gallipoli, the gateway to Istanbul. Fighting there was fierce, and continued until January 1916, but, on this front, there were relatively few civilian casualties, and no massacres.
On the eastern front, the situation was grimmer. The czar’s army had broken through the Ottoman defense lines in the Caucasus, and was laying waste to cities and villages in
That’s what the Turks were struggling with in 1915, and some Armenians struggled with them, serving in the Ottoman government, and fighting side-by-side with Turks in the Ottoman army. Most Armenians who demonstrated this kind of loyalty to the Ottoman state came from
But Armenians were hardly immune to the fierce currents of nationalism sweeping the region in the late 19th and early 20th century. In eastern Anatolia and the Caucasus, especially, many Armenians on both sides of the border saw the Russian invasion as their great chance to recreate their ancient Christian kingdom in
In 1915, Armenian generals were in the forefront of the Russian invasion: some led Russian troops; others led special Armenian battalions, made up of Armenian volunteers from both sides of the border; still others organized Turkish-Armenian military units be-hind the lines, capturing Anatolian cities like Van, even before the Russians arrived, joining the Russians in capturing Bitlis, Mus, and many other Turkish towns and villages, massacring Turks in a number of those places, before Ottoman reinforcements recaptured them in a long, bloody series of seesaw battles that raged throughout eastern Anatolia in 1915. Some Turkish civilians responded by massacring Armenians, and wild, outlaw tribes of Circassians and Kurds preyed on hapless civilians in both groups.
Of course, nothing justifies any of these massacres, but the claim that Ottoman government leaders ordered any of them is belied by the frequency with which, when they could, they tried and punished men responsible for them: not just Armenians, but many Turks, too, including government officials and military men found guilty of failing to protect civilians. But the Ottoman government in 1915 was no fount of wisdom. It was the product of a series of mutinies, coups, and countercoups that began in 1908, deposing one Sultan and installing another, most of whose rapidly eroding powers were seized in 1913 by three rebel leaders, Talat, Cemal and Enver. And in 1915, that triumvirate made a decision that resulted in many civilian deaths. They decided to deal with the civil war in eastern Anatolia by ordering Ottoman soldiers to march all Armenians out of the area, and resettle them in the Ottoman city of
Orders were given to distribute food and water as needed, and to protect the marchers. But, due to the chaos of war, the dearth of supplies, the critical shortage of troops needed at the fronts, and the competing tragedies playing out all around them, there was no chance that the transfer plan could be carried out humanely. It turned into a death march, comparable to the one our soldiers endured on
The bottom line here is that in actual historical fact, Turks were not like Nazis; Armenians were not like Jews; and attempts to convince Americans that they were are propaganda, not history. The Armenian tragedy was real and terrible, but it was not the only terrible tragedy in Turkey in 1915 and it wasn’t genocide; it was that in the midst of a wider war that brought death and destruction to millions on all sides, nationalist Armenians fought a war to claim a piece of Turkey for a country of their own, and lost. Later, they got a state of their own, but its development has been stunted from that day to this by high levels of poverty, corruption and political violence. If Armenians would accept their share of responsibility for the tragedies of 1915, trade with their increasingly prosperous Turkish neighbors could do much to alleviate that poverty. Some in Armenia have long wanted to do that, but most government leaders — and the powerful Armenian diaspora community those leaders rely on — have always insisted, instead, on demonizing Turks and whitewashing all Armenian actions in World War I. And, although they proved incompetent at governing, they achieved great success as propagandists. In this, Armenians are very similar to Palestinians; very different from both Jews and Turks.
And the urgent questions that these facts raise for us are these: How did a narrative so far from the facts gain such wide currency and power in contemporary
— Barbara Lerner is a frequent NRO contributor.
“Armenians... cannot expect this country (Great Britain) — or any other one — to choose any area in Turkey, to chase away from there all other races, to increase the Armenian population there under the shadow of British bayonets, and to thus organize a national Armenian existence there with exorbitant taxes to be extracted from the British people. Even the thought of it cannot go beyond being a raw fancy."
Lord Curzon, British statesman, PRO, FO. 800/151, 6.xii.1921
( A letter by a former Australian Ambassador published in The Australian Newspaper)
Mr. George Karagiannakis's letter (2/6/94), making all sorts of incredible allegations against Turkey in regard to its domestic and foreign policies, should not be allowed to go unanswered.
It is not possible in the space of a few lines to answer all of his allegations. However, in fairness to the truth, the following points must be made:
The 'facts beyond credible dispute' to which he alludes are in fact based largely on fictions to justify unrealistic ambitions or failures in the past to achieve totally unrealistic goals.
Whilst it is true and sad that many Armenians lost their lives in their own bid for territory, what is not recognized is that the Armenians themselves inflicted as much damage as others in the hostilities of that time, goaded on by some Western powers for their own selfish and geopolitical objectives.
The Turks had no deliberate policy of genocide at any stage, only the removal of Armenians from the front line with
The Kurdish issue is more complex. Two points are relevant:
The PKK, like IRA, is a terrorist organization, SUPPORTED MATERIALLY BY THE GREEKS AND ARMENIANS, with the stated objective of destabilizing
Most Kurds are integrated into Turkish society. About one-third of the Turkish Parliament is of Kurdish origin. This illustrates the absence of discrimination.
As for
The real problem between
Regarding persecution. the Ottomans had one of the most tolerant policies towards non-Turks of any empire of its day. The three communities of Jews, Greeks and Armenians were virtually autonomous within the empire.
P. F. Peters
Former Australian Ambassador to
(The Australian, June 9th, 1994)
Saturday, 28 April 2007
Norman Stone: 'There is No Armenian Genocide'
Famous British Historian says he is ready to be prisoned by France
JTW News (Saturday , 21 October 2006)
“The Armenian ‘genocide’ is an imperialist plot.” So said Dogu Perincek, in Marxist mode, and he chose to say it in
There have been similar events in other countries and now we have the French parliament passing a law that is harsher than the Swiss one – a year’s prison and a heavy fine. This is a ridiculous and contemptible business – bad history and worse politics. It is also financially very grubby indeed. We all know how the American legal system can work: lawyers will agree to work for nothing, in return for a share of the profits at the end of a court case. Court cases are very expensive and it can simply be easier for banks or firms or hospitals to agree to make a payment without any confession of liability, just because fighting the case would be absurdly expensive, and the outcome – given how the American jury system works – unpredictable. A burglar, crawling over a householder’s glass roof, fell through it, was badly wounded, and took the householder to court: result, a million dollars in damages. Class actions by Armenian Diaspora descendants in
But if
Diaspora Armenians claim that ‘historians’ accept the genocide case. There is some preposterous organization called ‘association of genocide scholars’ which does indeed endorse the Diaspora line, but who are they and what qualifications do they have? Knowing about
As to this, the experts are divided. A deportation gone wrong is the verdict of many of the best qualified historians – Bernard Lewis, Heath Lowry, Justin McCarthy, Yusuf Halacoglu. Other historians who know the old script and the background believe that it was a premeditated campaign of extermination, and some of these historians are Turkish (Mete Tuncay and Selim Deringil, unless I am taking their names in vain). There is a Turkish historian, Taner Akcam, whose book, based on the war-crimes trials set up in the early period of the British occupation, is obviously scholarly and who accepts the genocide thesis (though he does stress that the process cannot be compared with what happened in Nazi Germany to the Jews). In view of these divisions among scholars it is simply scandalous that the French or any other parliament should decree what the answer is. But it is worse, because the Armenian Diaspora can be extremely vindictive. For instance, Gilles Veinstein, as a reward for his quite dispassionate article, faced a campaign of vilification. He had become a candidate for the College de France, which elects the very best scholars in the country to give seminars. The historians very much welcomed this: he is an extremely serious scholar. But the Armenian Diaspora organized a campaign against him, especially among the mathematicians for some reason. One of them, a Professor Thom, was told that, on the whole, the French historians supported Veinstein and did not like the genocide thesis. His answer: ‘they are all Ottomanists,’ as if that somehow disqualified them. The fact is that the Armenian Diaspora have never taken this affair to a proper court of law. Instead, they try to silence men such as Veinstein. There was an extraordinary episode in American publishing two years ago. A very well-known historian, Gunther Lewy, who was a professor at the
Now, there is something very wrong here. If you believe that you are right, and then you will let evidence speak for itself, and if you face opposition you will simply expect to win the argument one way or the other. Attempts to silence opposition, to boycott lectures by, say, Justin McCarthy, to bully or manipulate foreign politicians – all of that surely argues that the Armenians themselves know their case is very far from being overwhelming. In any case it does nothing whatsoever for
What should
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Stone (1941-) is a British historian of modern Europe, especially Central and
A copy of a sworn affidavit by Edward Tashji (Turkish Armenian)
The following commentary is presented as a sworn affidavit by the undersigned, and Is intended to express explicitly my position on the subject of Turkish-Armenian relations. Being of sound mind and body, fully cognizant of my statements ,free of any coercion and/or any suggestion of any monetary recompense, I do hereby declare the comments in this written material are solely mine and for which I take full responsibility. My signature follows this declaration and It will appear at the conclusion of this commentary.
This is not intended to portray even a semblance of any historical research, nor to create a subterfuge in the _expression of my thinking and sincere feelings on a subject to which I have devoted a lifetime of attention. Simply stated, these pages are intended to reveal my position on a highly emotional issue based upon childhood experiences, an exposure to both the Armenian and Turkish communities, and as a result of long years of effort. The purpose of this life-long effort has been and by the grace of God, will continue to be two-fold:
first, to continue the bond of brotherhood between the Armenian and the Turkish peoples. Secondly, with the continuance of the six centuries of trust and harmony, to eradicate an infectious hatred which has manifested itself in innocent hearts and minds of succeeding generations. To say that my task has been most difficult and potentially dangerous to my life is not an exaggeration, as the content of this commentary will confirm. The average American is unaware that a serious problem between these ancestral brothers even exists.
However, as a result of a blatant anti-Turkish posture on the part of our news media, together with the acceptance by many members of Congress of one version of a tragic story, the Turkish Nation and its God-fearing people are being accused of genocide. The absurdity of the charge is equal only to the mindless hate merchants within the Armenian community. So why should my pro-Turkish position be of interest to anyone outside the Turkish Community?
It should I say, it must I emphasize, because I am not Turkish nor am I of the Moslem faith; In reality I am a Christian and an Armenian!! I was born In Troy, New York In 1932 as the second son of an Armenian mother and a Syrian Orthodox father, who had been eyewitness to the tragic events which took place In Ottoman Turkey during the First World War. In spite of their suffering, in spite of their losses, in our home our parents had taught us not to hate the Turkish people, In fact just the contrary was instilled in our hearts. We learned the realities of those events about which the West has accepted one interpretation as historical fact.
My wifes background is similar to my own, except that both of her parents were Armenian. Her support of my efforts and her endless patience have been my greatest source of encouragement. Do you think, dear reader, any book, any newspaper account, or any politician could outweigh the Influence upon me by my parents who were there!? They had no reason to give me false information, and their greatest gift to me was to love the traditions and culture of our peoples. Because of their wisdom, their compassion and their humanity, I was destined to be FREE of all animosity. Based upon THEIR comments to me, and after years of study and effort, (which cannot be described here), I offer for your consideration the following facts which should be recognized by every member of Congress:
1. That the Armenian people had suffered In Ottoman Turkey during the First World War is beyond dispute. Their suffering was brought about as a result of the ravages of war; they suffered as did the Arab, the Jew, the Syrian Orthodox, the Greek, as well as the Turkish Moslem. The suffering of the Armenians was NOT as a result of a genocide! To this day, the other ethnic and religious groups which had endured those terrible days, HAVE NOT referred to being the victims of genocide In Turkey! But Armenian extremists have used the term genocide as a way of concealing their own crimes:
2. My mother was born in Balikesir, not far from the city of
3. As a child my mother had learned a song which had been taught In Armenian school to all the children, The following is a translation, from the Armenian, of the only words I remember:
Let us slaughter the Turks Let us establish our own country... What would be our reaction if any cultural or religious community taught their children to kill Americans?!
4. Many Armenians after leaving their homes were allowed to RETURN and take possession of their homes and properties. My uncle was one who returned to his home, and my wifes aunt, who is still living, was another. Her family had returned to their home in Adlyaman.
5. As a refugee my mother was taken into the home of an Armenian family In the town of
6. The long list of ethnic Armenians who had attained the highest positions in the Ottoman Government is a matter of record.
7. Armenian fanaticism In Ottoman Turkey spread to our country during those years and It continues to this very day: The Armenian community and church in the
8. A so-called statement purportedly made by Adolf Huller referring to the plight of the Armenians, was, after extensive research, proven to be FALSE by historian Robert John, who like myself is born of Armenian ancestry!
9. The following is an exact quotation from a pamphlet printed and distributed by The Armenian Revolutionary Federation, here in
...Its History: Struggle for National Liberation. Founded in 1890, as a confederation of various action groups struggling for Armenian national and human rights, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, (ARF), known as Dashnaktsoutioun, carried on this struggle with all available means: political action, propaganda, and at times, armed struggle..
I direct the attention of the reader to the date: 1890! Tuenty-five years BEFORE the Armenians began with their theme song: genocide. Im certain you made notice of the words: ...armed struggle....
10. In her book entitled, The Armenian Revolutionary Movement, the author, Louise Nalbandlan, says about her book, In part, the following: This study covers in detail the armed struggle of the Armenian revolutionists against the Ottoman government, beginning with the first major disturbance in 1862 and extending to 1896... And they speak of genocide! It is the Turk who is justified in accusing the Armenian of this heinous crime! There is more, much much more which can refute the allegation made against
Once again our Congress considers the so-called Armenian Resolution. How dare they sit in judgment of a nation whose true history is not known by those who would accuse
Dear reader, these are the words of my beloved mother:
My son, we had everything in
THIS Is humanity! THIS Is Gods wish for all of us! THIS is the only answer if we are to give our children a world free of hatred! THIS Is what I have found In the Turkish heart; I stand in awe of their compassion, of their warmth, their humanity. I am proud that I have devoted a lifetime of service in behalf of our ancestral brothers and sisters. How we have labored, examples of our efforts, the Identity of the long list of government officials with whom we have met, how we were able to learn to speak Armenian and Turkish, why our home Is called an Ottoman home, and much more, is for another time between two hard covers perhaps. May I offer now my concluding statements:
Dear reader, to the Armenian I am a traitor, one who has committed the greatest sin; to the Turk 1 have come to be known as a, Turk dostu a friend of Turks; ours Is the embrace of brotherhood. I offer the reader my greatest success, that for which I have devoted much of my life, and this you will read on separate pages following my commentary. Read carefully please the writings of an Armenian student who sent me three letters. The most satisfying achievement in my humble life is the third and final letter I received from a young man whom I have never met. Indeed, read his words carefully an~ understand I have not turned against my people, for to do so would be to deny my mother.
I am convinced that hate breeds more hatred, and as we were blessed to have parents who passed on to us their message of love, so have I spoken to all who care to listen, our history, our culture and traditions, begin In Turkey as we have shared with her people the joys and the sorrows of that beautiful land. Today, the Armenians living in
EDWARD TASHJI
Director of Public Affairs Committee
The Federation of Turkish American Association
MICHAEL GUNTER: A REPLY TO JOSEPH KÉCHICHIAN AND KEITH WATENPAUGH
I would have preferred not to reply to these scurrilous attempts at academic character assassination by Joseph Kéchichian and Keith Watenpaugh, but silence might have been misconstrued as somehow agreeing with them.
The main argument these two try to make against me is that I did not agree with their interpretation of what happened to Armenians during World War I and that I did not have a right to write my review of Guenter Lewy's The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide in the first place because I praised the book on its back cover. The two even declaim that by publishing my review IJMES "rendered a disservice to its readers" that has "undermined the credibility of IJMES" because I am guilty of "unethical behavior," "fraud," and so forth. They also lecture IJMES that, although it should publish their five pages attacking Lewy and me, the journal should not publish any reply that I might choose to make. Perhaps noticing that I live in Tennessee, the two even hurl the proverbial kitchen sink my way by accusing me of using "lazy and anti-intellectual techniques" employed "by fundamentalist proponents of ‘Intelligent Design’ who advocate the inclusion of the supernatural " What incredible, self-righteous, pompously ignorant arrogance!
First, there is no academic rule that someone who pens a few words of praise for the back of a book cannot later write a review of it. If there were, a number of good reviews never would have been written. Clearly, my review should stand or fall on its merits, not some alleged rule invented by my two detractors.
Second, neither Guenter Lewy nor I deny the terrible suffering imposed upon the Armenians. Any objective reading of Lewy's book and my review will make this obvious. What we do not agree with is the interpretation many Armenians and others make that what befell Armenians constituted premeditated genocide as defined by Armenians and their many supporters. My two critics notwithstanding, Lewy and I are not alone in this contention. Indeed, Edward J. Erickson's review of Lewy's book in the Middle East Journal 60 (Spring 2006) finds much to praise about it and concludes, "I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in the question of what really happened to the Ottoman Armenians in 1915" (p. 379). Writing in the prestigious Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung on 23 March 2006, the distinguished German scholar of comparative genocide, Eberhard Jackel, also praised Lewy's book. A number of years ago IJMES also published a heated exchange between Richard G. Hovannisian and the late Stanford J. Shaw, "Forum: The Armenian Question" (IJMES 9 [1978], 379–400). Such distinguished scholars of Ottoman history as Bernard Lewis, Roderic Davison, J. C. Hurewitz, and Andrew Mango, among others, have all rejected the appropriateness of the genocide label for what occurred. I guess this makes these other major scholars and publications also guilty of "fraud" and other related sins by daring to publish such thoughts!
Joseph Kéchichian furthermore incorrectly opines that "Gunter, the reviewer, occupies a central place in the massive campaign—ardently promoted by successive Turkish governments—to deny the Armenian genocide … even though he has not produced a single work with a focus on this subject." As anyone who knows my work on the Kurdish and Armenian questions realizes, I often have taken critical stands against the Turkish government. (Maybe the Turkish government has hired me to throw its critics off the scent!) In contrast, Joseph Kéchichian and Keith Watenpaugh clearly are spokespersons for the longtime, massive Armenian campaign to trash any scholars who dare to disagree with their own particular version of history. Indeed, in
As for Kéchichian's erroneous assertion that I never "produced a single work with a focus on this subject," I would like to call to his attention a lengthy article I wrote (in an Armenian journal no less) on "The Historical Origins of the Armenian–Turkish Enmity" in a special issue on "Genocide and Human Rights" (Journal of Armenian Studies IV, nos. 1–2 [1992], 257–88). A shorter, slightly different version appeared as "The Historical Origins of Contemporary Armenian Terrorism" (Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies 9 [Fall 1985], 77–96). He might also note my short piece, "Why Do the Turks Deny They Committed Genocide against the Armenians?" published in the leading German journal on
Moreover, my being asked over the years to write five separate reviews in the two leading journals on Middle Eastern studies in the
Furthermore, my book "Pursuing the Just Cause of Their People": A Study of Contemporary Armenian Terrorism (1986) opened with an entire chapter comparing differing Armenian and Turkish positions on what happened in 1915. It received some of the following positive reviews. "This is in every respect a splendid book, which every university library and individual interested in the contemporary Middle East ought to purchase" (Middle East Studies Bulletin 21 [December 1987]). "Professor Michael Gunter's study of contemporary Armenian terrorism is … carefully chronicled, and there is much material which helps to explain subsequent developments. … Well documented. … Gunter has made a notable contribution" (Middle Eastern Studies 25 [October 1989]). "The book is an important one for anyone requiring a systematic account of a terrorist movement that began attacking Turkish officials and offices" (Christian Science Monitor, 10 March 1987). Illustrating the egregiously shocking way he interprets facts, however, Joseph Kéchichian pontificates that my book deals with "alleged Armenian ‘terrorism.’" Alleged? If this is how Kéchichian views recent Armenian terrorism, how can one trust his version of earlier events?
Finally surfeiting themselves with their badly conceived ad hominem attacks on my academic ethics and qualifications, these two Armenian gentlemen next turn their self-righteous diatribes against the accuracy of Lewy's book. Although they make some valid points regarding the Armenian massacres that neither Lewy nor I deny, the two also commit several blunders and possibly outright falsifications in their haste to preach to the choir. For example, they maintain "that a host of Turkish historians" are now agreeing with the Armenian version of history. Kéchichian manages, however, to name only five. Although their position provides food for thought, it hardly amounts to a mass conversion of Turkish scholars to the Armenian line. Indeed, the claim by one of the five (Taner Akcam) that Kemal Ataturk accepted the Armenian version of history is simply not true. Rather, Ataturk criticized the incompetence of the Ottoman government for not alleviating the sufferings of both Armenians and ethnic Turks.
Kéchichian further faults Lewy for not being able to read Ottoman and Turkish and for relying on two anonymous Turkish-speaking persons and others for translating important documents for him. Seeking to draw negative implications from this anonymity, Kéchichian declaims that their names have been "suspiciously withheld." This, of course, is simply another red herring because the translations will stand or fall on their accuracy, not on who made them. What probably really bothered Kéchichian here is that Lewy illustrates several times how pro-Armenian sources cite Turkish sources out of context or simply juxtapose them with ellipses to create different meanings. Vahakn N. Dadrian, often cited as one of the leading contemporary Armenian scholars of these events, is listed by Lewy as one of those who sometimes engages in these practices.
It is also interesting that inability to read Turkish does not prevent Kéchichian from praising as genocide experts Donald Bloxham, Robert Melson, and Leo Kuper, among others, who also do not know Turkish. In addition, if Kéchichian and his supporters understand Ottoman so well, why do some of them continue to tout as genocide evidence such obvious forgeries as the so-called Naim–Andonian documents and the supposed secret Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) meeting of February 1915 described by Mevlanzade Rifat? They weaken their own case by adding such spurious sources.
Kéchichian makes Esref Kuscubasi's statement that he was "a man who had assumed a secret assignment" read to be a confession of genocidal guilt, but as a head of the Special Organization, Kuscubasi naturally dealt with secret assignments. Taking that as a genocidal confession is the real distortion. General Mehmet Vehip's statements are hardly decisive. If the Ottoman government had been behind an extermination plan, Vehip was not in a position to know, as he was not part of the inner circles of power. At the most, Vehip was simply providing his own opinion, as he also did when he foolishly opined that Ataturk's war of independence was ruinous for the country. Leslie Davis was "not a rare eyewitness to mass murder." What he saw was corpses. How those people died and who killed them are matters open to debate.
If Lewy's book may have been distributed free to a few libraries, it does not demonstrate that his book is somehow illegitimate. The fact that Lewy was presented with an award by the Center for Eurasian Strategic Studies (ASAM), a Turkish think tank, does not prove that he is lying and in the service of the Turkish government. An author does not control such matters. Kéchichian's claim that ASAM's "mission includes propagandistic and partisan research and publication" is an apt description of the Armenian Zoryan Institute that has published some of Taner Akcam's work. Erik Jan Zurcher received the Medal of High Distinction from the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, although he concluded in Turkey: A Modern History (1993) that "while the Ottoman government as such was not involved in genocide there was a centrally controlled policy of extermination, instigated by the CUP" (p. 121).
These problems, of course—and overly pious Turkish denials of any wrongdoing—do not prove or disprove what really occurred. Thirty years ago Gwynne Dyer aptly expressed the state of the disorderly discourse between most Armenian and Turkish exponents when he titled a revealing short analysis "Turkish ‘Falsifiers’ and Armenian ‘Deceivers’: Historiography and the Armenian Massacres" (Middle Eastern Studies 12 [January 1976]). Guenter Lewy also finds that "both sides have used heavy-handed tactics to advance their cause and silence a full and impartial discussion of the issues in dispute" (p. 238). However, his attempt to demonstrate this is denounced as a "fraud" by his Armenian critics.
Why then do most scholars accept uncritically the Armenian version of these events and demonize those who object? Why do Turks continue to maintain their innocence in the face of so much evidence? One must realize that the Armenian massacres in 1915 did not occur out of the blue but followed decades of Armenian violence and revolutionary activity that then elicited Turkish counterviolence. There are a plethora of Turkish sources documenting these unfortunate events. However, much more accessible to Western audiences are the studies by such eminent scholars as William L. Langer, The Diplomacy of Imperialism: 1890–1902 (1935) and Arnold J. Toynbee, The Western Question in
Armenians also have documented well that they sometimes gave as good as they received. See, for example, Louise Nalbandian, The Armenian Revolutionary Movement: The Development of Armenian Political Parties through the Nineteenth Century (1963), James G. Mandalian, ed., Armenian Freedom Fighters: The Memoirs of Rouben der Minasian (1963), and Garegin Pasdermadjian (Armen Garo), Bank Ottoman: Memoirs of Armen Garo (1990), among others. The Armenians, of course, present themselves as freedom fighters in these earlier events, but the objective scholar can understand how the Turks saw them as revolutionary and treasonous and may thus hesitate to characterize their response in 1915 as "genocide."
Moreover, throughout all these events, Armenians were never more than a large minority even in their historic provinces. However, they exaggerated their numbers before World War I and their losses during the war. Indeed, if Armenian figures for those who died were correct, there would have been few left at the end of the war. Instead, the Armenians managed to fight another war against the emerging Turkish republic following World War I for mastery in eastern
Furthermore, as Christians, Armenians found a sympathetic audience in the West. Muslim Turks, by contrast, were the historic enemy of the Christian West. In addition, Armenians were much more adept at foreign languages than Turks and thus able to present their case more readily to the rest of the world. When the events in question occurred, Turks were again the enemy of the West and the object of Western propaganda. Of course, none of this excuses the horrible abuses that occurred, but these facts put what happened into a more accurate context and begin to explain why Turks feel that the term "premeditated genocide" is unfair to describe what occurred, especially when Armenians deny any guilt.
Moreover, Armenian willingness to employ unwise violence continued into more recent times despite the attempt by Joseph Kéchichian to term the murder of numerous Turkish diplomats in the 1970s and 1980s as merely "alleged Armenian terrorism." Several of these murders occurred in the
BOOKS
Death and Exile The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims 1821 - 1922 Professor Justin McCarthy The Darwin Press Inc Princeton
The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman
ITG TELEFON HATLARINI KULLANINIZ.
TURKISH FORUM UN ANLASMA YAPTIGI ITG SIRKETI
VASITASI ILE YAPACAGINIZ KONUSMALARIN NET GELIRI TURKISH FORUMA BAGIS OLARAK DONECEKDIR
LUTFEN TIKLAYINIZ , ABONE OLUNUZ ..HIZMETE DEVAM ICIN BIZE IMKAN TANIYINIZ ..
Tasarruf icin diz ustu veya masa ustu bilgisayarinizi her gittiginiz yere cebinizde tasimayiniz
Nerede Olursaniz Olun Ceb Veya Ev Telefonunuzdan
En Ucuz Telefon Fiatlari, En Temiz Hatlar ve
En Suratli Baglantilar icin http://turkishforum.itgcards.com/turkce/
AIDATLARINIZ VE BAGISLARINIZI LUTFEN YARINA BIRAKMAYINIZ,
SIZE, TURKIYEYE VE DUNYA TURK TOPLUMUNA HIZMETINI DESTEKLEYINIZ
TURKISH FORUM Ana DagItIm Serveri Yeni Emniyet ProgramlarI ve Teknolojinin Sundugu En HIzlI Multi DagItIm HatlarI ile 5 KItadan 250 BIN Uyesine Hizmet icin yeniden Web Sistemine Yeniden Girdi.
Turkish Forum’u Ya$atacak Olan
DESTEGiNiZi, AiDATLARINIZI VE BAGISLARINIZI LUTFEN YARINA BIRAKMAYINIZ
http://www.turkishforum.com/tr/bagis.html
Turkish Forum is an 501-C(3) Tax Exempt, Non Profit & Charitable Organization
~_~_~_~_~~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~__~_~_~_~__~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_~_
TURKISH FORUM
Grassroots Makes the Difference
Join To Turkish Forum And In Turkish Forum Join With Turks And With Friends Of Turks Across The Globe . Turkish Forum is Designed To Empower You As An Energetic And Effective Ambassador For Turkey, For The Turkish Cause And For The Turkish World.
Grasroots-giris@turkishforum.org
- Network, with national, regional, and local leaders.
- Share experiences, with old and new friends from across the Globe
- Sharpen your ability, at the national, state and local levels.
- Learn effective ways, build coalitions, and mobilize your local grassroots base.
- Develop effective methods; promote positive coverage of Turkish issues.
- Engage with officials, Relations with
- Support Turkish Cause by supporting The Turkish Forum, www.turkishforum.com/tr/bagis.html
.Turkish Forum is an 501-C(3) Tax Exempt, Non Profit & Charitable Organization.
Turkish Forum is a Network, PR and a Lobbying Foundation
Turk Forum Dayanisma, Halkla Iliskiler & Lobi kurulusudur
Gayemiz : Hur Dunya devletleri ve Turkiye arasIndaki askeri, ticari ve kulturel ili$kilere zarar veren sorunlarIn giderilmesine destek vermek; Turkiye ile Hur Dunya devletleri arasIndaki stratejik ittifakIn oneminin kamuoyuna ve ozel sektore anlatmak; Turkiyenin tarih, kultur ve geleneklerinin Dunya devletleri tarafindan daha iyi anla$IlmasInI saglamak; Turkiyenin di$ Ticari gucunun dI$ politikamIzda kullanilmasi icin ozel sektorler arasIndaki diyalogu arttIrmak; Turkiye icin Onemli olan konular hakkInda Uyelerimize bilgi iletmek, Dunya Turk Toplumunu Turkiye ve Turk toplumlarInIn sorunlarInI cozmek icin gerekli sahalarda topyekun mobilize ederek olaylarin akI$InI yonlendirmek.
Turkiyemize Gerektigi Anda Uzmanlık SahanIzda Gonullu Veya Ucretli Destek Vermek Icin Sizinle Temas KurmamIzI IstiyorsanIz
Lutfen Veri TabanIna KaydInIzI YapInIz
www.turkishforum.com/tr/turkdb.html
Turkish Forum’a Uye Olmak için:
Mesaj AldIgInIz E-Posta HesabInIzdan Once
grassroots-giris@turkishforum.org Adresine içi Bo$ Bir Mesaj Gondermeniz Ve Sonra www.turkishforum.com/tr/turkdb.html
ADRESINDEN VERI TABANINA KAYIT YAPTIRMANIZ YETERLI OLACAKTIR. Listeden CIkmak için ise Bilgiler En Sonda Verilmi$tir.
To remove yourself from this list send a blank message to grassroots-cikis@turkishforum.org from the email account you are getting messages to
LISTEDEN CIKMAK ICIN:
Mesaj aldiginiz eposta hesabinizdan grassroots-cikis@turkishforum.org adresine ici bos bir mesaj gondermeniz yeterli olacaktir.
LISTEYE GIRMEK ICIN:
Mesaj almak istediginiz eposta hesabinizdan grassroots-giris@turkishforum.org adresine ici bos bir mesaj gondermeniz yeterli olacaktir.
Yorum, Fikir, Haberlerinizi bize iletebilirsiniz.
TurkishForum Projelerine Maddi Destek Vermek Cok Kolay!
TurkDB ucretsiz kaydinizi yaptirdinizmi?
TURKISH FORUMA CALISMALARI ICIN DESTEK VERINIZ
- OZEL serverlerini ve internet hatlarini bilgi iletimi icin acik tutan
- Turkiyemize dis politakasinda TOPYEKUN DESTEK VERMEMIZI SAGLIYAN,
- Turkiye Disindaki Turk Toplumlarina sistemli olarak destek veren,
- Tum Turk Kuruluslari ile Turkiye ve Turk Halki icin beraber calisan,
- Dunya Turk Toplumundan gelen bir itmeden dogan TEK KURULUSDUR.
Sema Karaoglu, Founder Meltem Birkegren, Director
www.DofA.org
www.wearetheturks.org
Daughters of Atatürk is proud to promote Turkish Heritage across the globe. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk shaped the legacy we proudly inherited.
His integrity and dynamism and vision constantly inspires us. We are thankful to him for walking the untrodden path, achieving the unimaginable dream, living the eternal vision. We are the Turks, we are the future of Turkey.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder