The truth hurts, and provokes fury -- a reaction we have seen from Islamic supremacists many times when their full agenda is exposed here. "President Abdullah Gul has warned that 'Turkey will not be responsible for the negative ramifications' of the vote." Yes, that's a threat.
An update on this story. "Turkey urges US to block 'genocide' bill or risk ties," by Sibel Utku Bila for AFP, March 5 (thanks to Block Ness):
ANKARA (AFP) - A furious Turkey warned of damage to its ties with the US and protesters descended on the American embassy on Friday after a Congressional panel labelled the Ottoman-era massacre of Armenians as genocide.Having recalled its ambassador immediately after the panel's resolution was adopted, Ankara warned Washington risked a showdown with a key Muslim ally if the motion advanced to a full vote at the House of Representatives.
Turkey is "seriously disturbed" that President Barack Obama's administration "did not put enough weight" behind efforts to prevent the resolution from being passed by the Foreign Affairs Committee, Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said.
"We expect the US administration to make more efficient efforts from now on," he said.
"We hope Turkish-US ties will not be put to a new test ... otherwise, the prospect that we will face will not be a positive one," he added, calling the issue a "matter of national honour".
NATO member Turkey is a prominent Muslim partner in US efforts to stabilise Afghanistan and Iraq, and lies on a key route taking oil and natural gas to Western markets....
President Abdullah Gul has warned that "Turkey will not be responsible for the negative ramifications" of the vote.
As Turkish anger swelled, a crowd of around 100 demonstrated outside the US embassy in Ankara, laying a black wreath that read "We did not commit genocide, we defended the motherland."
Protesters chanted anti-US slogans at a similar demonstration in Istanbul....
The non-binding resolution calls on Obama to ensure that US foreign policy reflects an understanding of the "genocide" and to label the mass killings as such in his annual statement on the issue....
Washington has traditionally condemned the killings, but refrained from calling them a "genocide", anxious not to strain relations with Turkey.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had urged the committee not to hold the vote for fear it might harm Armenia-Turkey reconciliation.
During a visit to Turkey in April, Obama said he retained his view that the killings amounted to genocide but stressed that reconciliation between the two neighbours was more important.
And he's so good at reconciliation.
'President Abdullah Gul has warned that "Turkey will not be responsible for the negative ramifications" of the vote.'
Hey, Gul, show us how irked you are by refusing to take American hand-outs from now on, then we will believe you.
1) Refuse to buy, or still better, refuse to accept, for free, American military equipment, including airplanes.
2) Refuse to allow Turks to study in the United States, especially at MIT and Cal Tech.
3) Boycott all American goods, especially computers.
4) Boycott all American services, especially those having to do with advanced technology.
5) Create an atmosphere that will discourage American and other Western tourists, who continue to flock to Istanbul under the assumption -- possibly soon to be a misapprehension -- that because of Kemalism, Turkey was the one relatively safe Muslim country to visit and besides, along with a mosque or two there was the palimpsest of civilizations -- Byzantine, Roman, Greek -- that had not been destroyed as have so many pre-Islamic artifacts and monuments in other Muslim countries.
6) Move ever closer to the Islamic Republic of Iran, and to the Alawite Republic of Syria, and to the Hezbollah Republic of Lebanon, and obtain goods and services from them.
6) Let us know how it all turns out. We'll be all ears.
What next, if we don't continue to pretend that they were not religiously motivated mass murderers and history never happened, then, when we really need them as a "vital ally" and NATO member, like at a time of war, they may not cooperate with us militarily?
Oh, they already did that...
It was noted in the Israeli press that this time Turkey did not go to Israel, and ask (or demand?) and receive as they have in the past, her lobbying support to halt this resolution from going forward
Something to ponder.
What is most interesting about this issue is, present Turks are mostly assimilated Armenians. First Turkish tribes came to Anatolia from Central Asia were Mongoloid people. After centuries Turks became Caucasian. Grand-grandparents of many Turks were actually Armenians. This is supported by genetic research.
http://tiny.cc/yjUAE
Unfortunately Turks are loyal to those Turkic invaders, not native people of Anatolia.
I have posted on this before but it bears repeating.
For those who may be confused about the motivation for the Genocide I provide this:
My grandfather was born in 1890 and emigrated to the US prior to 1900; he passed away in 1986 at the age of 96.
He lived through the Hamid massacres in the mid 1890's and would recall a few of unforgettable events he witnessed. One was the immolation of an Armenian priest in the churchyard. The priest had been tied to a tree and burnt alive.
My grandfather never spoke of the Turks per se but only of the Mohammedans.
He knew that religious hatred fueled this violence.
The Turks like to speak of Armenian collaboration with the Russians during WWI as reason to regard them as disloyal subjects.
WWI started about 20 years later. There were other massacres of Armenians, on a smaller scale prior to the Red Sultan's (Hamid) pogrom against the Armenians.
Turkish denial of the Armenian/Christian genocide is really quite lame, but they are sticking with it.
The US-Turkish alliance effectively ended in 2003, when Turkey refused US use of Turkish territory in the invasion of Iraq, thus dramatically complicating our war plans and preventing a two-front attack. One can argue that the Turks had legitimate reasons to do so and that the absence of WMD stockpiles in Iraq validated their decision, but that doesn't change the fact that they turned their backs on us in our hour of need (in spite of the fact that we offered them $6 billion for their trouble).
Since that decision in 2003, Turkish foreign policy has been - much more often than not, antithetical to US interests. The Turks have re-oriented their policies away from traditional friends (US, Europe, Israel) and towards anti-Western countries in the region (Syria & Iran). They've been an enabler of Iran's nuke program and have encouraged a vicious anti-Americanism, anti-semitism and enmity towards Israel in their domestic politics.
In other words, even in the realm of realpolitik, there is very little left to lose by America's speaking the truth about the Armenian genocide. We did the right thing.
Reported elsewhere:
"The picture shows that the U.S. administration did not put enough weight behind the issue," Davutoglu told reporters. "We are seriously disturbed by the result."
"We are seriously disturbed". Chronically. Period. Much more accurate.
"Also at stake are defense contracts. Turkey is an important market for U.S. defense companies, many of which had lobbied against the measure."
So we have barrels of pork on the menu. What's new. More to the point, what assurances does Washington have that arms sold to Turkey are not used against, for example, Turkish Kurds?
'Turkey is "seriously disturbed" '
Damned right. Psychotic I'd say.
I smirk that the Turks are irked.
Firk 'em!
"Protesters chanted anti-US slogans at a similar demonstration in Istanbul...."
LOL! Go screw yourselves Turks! Oh my, I just insulted "Turkishness!" GREAT! You Muzlim mass-murderers.
"Turkey is "seriously disturbed"
So right. You're Muslims following Islam. Which means: You're seriously disturbed. The whole world knows that.
"Since that decision in 2003, Turkish foreign policy has been - much more often than not, antithetical to US interests. The Turks have re-oriented their policies away from traditional friends (US, Europe, Israel) and towards anti-Western countries in the region (Syria & Iran). They've been an enabler of Iran's nuke program and have encouraged a vicious anti-Americanism, anti-semitism and enmity towards Israel in their domestic politics.
In other words, even in the realm of realpolitik, there is very little left to lose by America's speaking the truth about the Armenian genocide. We did the right thing."
-- from a posting by "Cornelius" above
But for six years after 2003, the same poster continued to argue that it was folly to promote an independent Kurdistan because that would antagonize our "ally" Turkey. The argument made for American support of an independent Kurdistan was not based on "rights" but on the usefulness of having a non-Arab Muslim people being able to throw off the Arab yoke, and being seen to do so (and also being seen to have to resist attempts by Arabs, both Shi'a and Sunni, to re-impose that yoke) by the 80% of the world's Muslims who are not Arabs.
Perhaps that poster has changed his mind.
In other words, even in the realm of realpolitik, there is very little left to lose by America's speaking the truth about the Armenian genocide. We did the right thing.
----posting by "Cornelius"
Realpolitik, defined by Merriam-Webster online this way:politics based on practical and material factors rather than on theoretical or ethical objectives
Turkey is a Muslim nation, now and in the past and as such has never been and will never be our ally.
The Incirlik Air base, a restored ancient church or a bag of apricots does not make them so.
Memo to the United States - and everyone else in the free non-Muslim world.
Stick up for the Armenians. Ignore the wailings, squawkings, threats and contemptible genocide-denial of the Turkish Muslims. Everybody - including the USA - shamefully betrayed our fellow non-Muslims, the Armenians, in the 19th and early 20th century. If the USA were to stick its neck out for the Armenians now, well, better late than never. Never too late to repent, ask forgiveness, and offer restitution.
Make friends with Armenia. Invest in them. Help them so they can defend themselves against Jihad that could at any moment in the future be launched at them from Turkey, or from Muslim Azerbaijan, or from Iran; this can surely be done in a manner that makes clear to Russia that this is about helping an Orthodox Christian state to defend itself against the Mohammedan hordes. Armenians will be tremendously grateful for friendship, economic investment, etc. They will NOT doublecross you as the Muslims will. Do it in memory and in honour of that courageous Armenian-American, 'John Roy Carlson', who unforgettably wrote 'The Plotters' and 'Under Cover', exposing Nazi and Communist would-be subverters of America, as well as writing the equally lid-lifting 'Cairo to Damascus' which was I think the first real attempt to expose the sinister Muslim Brotherhood to the view of the ordinary Western public.
Turkey - so long as it remains majority-Muslim, heavily suffused with Islam - can never be a permanent or trustworthy ally of ANY non-Muslim country (and Russia knows that too, from bitter experience, just read John Quincy Adams' magnificent description and denunciation of the way in which the Ottomans continually doublecrossed and backstabbed the Russians in all their dealings with them, a phenomenon which JQA correctly ascribed to the influence of Islam).
And to be grimly realistic, all non-Muslim parties (whether Armenia or Russia or the USA or anybody else) need to get it through their heads that unless and until, per miraculum, per impossibile, an overwhelming majority of Turks were to openly and permanently apostasise from Islam, there is just NO WAY that there can be any real 'reconciliation' between Turkey and Armenia, either: because Muslims are taught, by the Quran itself, NEVER to befriend, or to form a real and lasting agreement with, any non-Muslim.
Here - very slightly modified by me, in the second last sentence, is Mr Hugh Fitzgerald's lapidary formulation of the problem.
It was written by him with regard to the predicament of Israel but needs to be translated into Armenian (for reference in all Armenian dealing with the Turks and with heavily-Islamified Azerbaijan with whom Armenia has a territorial dispute), into Hindi (for India, for reference in all dealing with Pakistan over Kashmir), and for good measure, into Thai and Tagalog the Filipino lingua franca: that is, as the basic principle to be learned by heart and borne perpetually in mind by ALL majority nonMuslim states which have Muslims across the borders and/ or face local or regional rebellion by Mohammedan 'minorities'.
"Neither Israel itself, nor many in the outside world, seem willing to comprehend that there is no solution, one-state or two-state or n-state, to the Jihad.
"There is only the matter of remaining overwhelmingly -- and perceptibly -- more powerful, capable of wreaking great damage on those who would attack.
"No treaty with Infidel states, and Israel is such a state, can conceivably be permanently honored by a Muslim signatory.
"Pacta sunt servanda is a Western idea.
"In the Muslim world, treaties – if made with Infidels - are not to be obeyed, but to be violated, as soon as the Muslim side feels itself strong enough to press its advantage.
"The model for all time is Muhammad’s treaty with the Meccans in 628 AD, the Treaty of Hudaybiyya, insincerely made and treacherously broken.
'See Robert Spencer's The Truth About Muhammad, pp 136-39, and Majid Khadduri, ‘War & Peace in the Law of Islam’.
Hugh Fitzgerald, writing on Robert Spencer’s jihadwatch website, 15.8.2006.
How would the first three sentences look, if this statement were to be adapted for Armenian use?
"Neither Armenia itself, nor the United States, seems willing to comprehend that there is no solution to the Jihad.
"There is only the matter of remaining overwhelmingly -- and perceptibly -- more powerful, capable of wreaking great damage on those who would attack.
"No treaty with Infidel states, and Armenia is such a state, can conceivably be permanently honored by a Muslim signatory."
In other words: Armenia CANNOT and MUST NOT rely on any 'reconciliation', treaty or agreement, either with Azerbaijan (overwhelmingly populated by Muslims) or with Turkey (overwhelmingly populated by Muslims). It would be better not to even enter into negotiations; not to waste time and energy making any such agreement, which CANNOT be relief upon, or attempting any 'reconciliation' (which on the Muslim side, will be entirely spurious and temporary, and a snare and delusion for the non-Muslim party).
Armen
welcome to this forum. Your grandfather's testimony bears re-posting, for there are always new non-Muslim visitors to this forum, many of them woefully ill-informed to begin with.
I myself know of the ongoing jihad genocide of the Armenians - not only the grand orgy of murder gleefully carried out by Muslims (whether Turkish, Arab, or Kurdish) that took place in 1915-1916, but also the earlier mass killings... those of the 1890s, and then right back through history to the horrors inflicted upon the Armenians during the initial Muslim invasion and conquest of their homeland.
Feel free to let us know, here in this forum, the dates, places and times of any commemorations, marches, memorial lectures, etc., that the Armenian community in assorted Western countries may be holding in connection with the Genocide of the Armenians. Perhaps such events need to be made bigger and louder and publicised well beyond the Armenian community. I am sure that every jihadwatcher here would hasten to attend any such event that they were able to get to.
People here have been to pro-Copt rallies, and pro-Israel rallies; we will be only too happy to also show solidarity with the Armenians. Just tell us where and when to show up!
For Armen, and for any other Armenian who may happen to read this, now or in the future.
One of my all-time favourite songs: the hauntingly, heart-breakingly beautiful Armenian folk lullaby, 'Chinar es', "You are a plane-tree". I am Australian, so it is of particular piquancy for me that this particular performance by the great Armenian Soprano - Arax Mansourian - was recorded at a recital in the Art Gallery of NSW in Sydney, Oct 2007.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHOJR2KdkWo
Armen - could you possibly give us a translation of the lyrics? I can't seem to find one on the net.
In the comments on youtube, below the clip I've just posted, this one is worthy of note -
"The work of Komitas [who collected and recorded the song] is pure amazing.
"He collected all Armenian traditional music just YEARS before the genocide, and basically saved the Armenian music from being lost to history.
"He did this in order to PROVE to the questioners that Armenians have their own music and it isnt stolen stuff from other cultures.
"This is just ONE song, and he wrote more that 3000!!! Unfortunately, the genocide horrors and turkish [ethnic] cleansing caused for the "destruction" of many of the ancient songs Only 1000 remain:(".
There is a great deal of glorious music, both sacred (liturgical, and popular religious) and profane, in Armenian culture.
The modern composer Hovhaness is Armenian.
Think of it: that tiny, tormented, oppressed Christian community, that captive nation, has produced far, far more that is wholly beautiful, and worthy of admiration by the wider world, than any part of dar al Islam has ever done.
A few more samples of Armenian music. This stuff is so beautiful it takes your breath away.
Something called 'songs of sunset'.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXe-TP65HBI&feature=related
'Antuni'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctz_Yh1I--I&feature=related
And another lullaby (also from the recital at the NSW Art Gallery in 2007)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2SULyRAahQ&feature=related
Different performance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYntkoHaMM4&feature=related
Same song, and lovely images:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTGQD_QK4BA&feature=related
Consider these as the equivalent of a big, welcoming hug from me to any Armenian here present. Your music is glorious!
May God bless you and protect your little homeland from the menacing Mohammedans across its borders.
""We expect the US administration to make more efficient efforts from now on," he said."
- mohammedans are in no position to make demands
""President Abdullah Gul has warned that "Turkey will not be responsible for the negative ramifications" of the vote."
-mohammedans do not respect truth and do not understand accountability - and delight in making threats... because there is one thing they respect: force
When we will stop placating these barbarians?
We should cut off all aid to these nations and isolate them.
I wrote to both my senators to support the Armenian genocide resolution, and detailed why Turkey should not be in NATO. Looks like I have some company for all this...finally.
Wow, this says it all:
"We did not commit genocide, we defended the motherland."
...we weren't gaily killing Armenians because we hate them. No, no! It's because, you see, they were a threat to us. This tiny minority of peaceful christians so threatened our islamic "motherland" that they had to be killed. It's too bad because we were so fond of them and all that...
Just like the Nazis didn't kill the Jews to commit genocide -- just to protect the motherland from the "filthy parasites".
So glad they clarified this for us...
HUGH: "Perhaps that poster has changed his mind."
My position has been consistent. You were the one who kept insisting that an increasingly Islamist Turkey could be prevailed upon to betray their national interests and accept an independent Kurdish polity...based on what I believe is (was?) your inflated view of American power & influence in the region...a view that would have been particularly undermined when coupled with the other facets of your Iraq strategy, primarily, unilateral withdrawal in the midst of an on-going insurgency.
My view of the Turks was - in my opinion - much more realistic. I believe they would have gone to war rather than see an independent Kurdistan. And an America that had left Iraq in ashes - as you long advocated - would have had no stomach (and certainly no public support) to re-intervene.
In other news, the Turks now insist that there wasn't an Armenian genocide because, well, they thought they were Greeks!
http://www.hellenicgenocide.org/
I seem to recall a quote that the Kaiser's officers leading the Turkish troops were appalled at the bloodthirsty brutality of the Turks. Some report that the not-so-grand mufti served with them in Smyrna. They trained him well...
I see direct links between the Turkish genocides and nazi holocaust.
At what point will the Turks begin to delegitimize Attaturk?
Egads, hope we can keep this plague of a country out of the EU!
And yes Sashland, Hajj Amin al-Hussain grand mufti of Jerusalem was participating in the genocide of the Armenians.
That very same scumbag Hajj Amin al-Hussain that persuaded Adolf Eichmann to commit Germany to Der Endlösung.
"1) Refuse to buy, or still better, refuse to accept, for free, American military equipment, including airplanes.
2) Refuse to allow Turks to study in the United States, especially at MIT and Cal Tech.
3) Boycott all American goods, especially computers.
4) Boycott all American services, especially those having to do with advanced technology.
............ET AL"
bwahahahahahahahaha..that will show us Americans a thing or two...
No, you have mistated my argument. I said that the Turks might be persuaded to accept an independent Kurdistan as a fait accompli if the Americans could elicit, on behalf of Turkey, from an independent Kurdistan that would be totally dependent, militarily and diplomatically, on the United States, a promise not to make revanchist claims on Anatolia, though at the same time the Americans should be happy to encourage all sorts of trouble-making by the Kurds in Kurdish-populated areas of Iran and Syria, the two Muslim countries (though Syria is ruled by Alawites, quasi-quasi Muslims) that are causing us the most trouble at the moment. What if Turkey had refused to contemplate an independent Kurdistan? How able would it be to move large numbers of troops, through Kurdish-populated (there are 15 million Kurds in Turkey)areas, without any problem, and then into northern Iraq? Would this be easy? Hard? Harder if the Americans cut off all supplies of parts for tanks and planes and so on? The Americans, too, have sticks as well as carrots, for Turkey is not nearly as important, nor especially useful or trustworthy, as it was in the Cold War, against the forces of Islam, and especially not if the Turkish secularists in the army are pushed aside, forcibly retired, or cashiered, and others, more to the PKP's liking, are deliberately promoted, thus transforming that army.
Hugh,
I'm not trying to be argumentative...and I'm not trying to rehash old arguments. I just want you to look closely at what you were advocating...
HUGH: "...an independent Kurdistan that would be totally dependent, militarily and diplomatically, on the United States"
This is the same United States that was supposed to have just walked away from Iraq in the middle of a civil conflict (again, as you long advocated). You don't think the Kurds would have taken America's credibility and staying power into account as they pondered their options?
HUGH: "...a promise not to make revanchist claims on Anatolia"
Do you really believe the Turks would have been mollified by such a promise? Don't you believe they would have viewed it more realistically, that once the genie of Kurdish nationhood was let out of the bottle, it would have developed a trans-national volition and dynamic of its own. Promises are cheap, particularly in that part of the world.
HUGH: "...though at the same time the Americans should be happy to encourage all sorts of trouble-making by the Kurds in Kurdish-populated areas of Iran and Syria"
I see. A nascent Kurdish state, instead of trying to alleviate regional concerns (particularly Turkish), about revanchism, would deliberately stoke the flames of Kurdish nationalism in neighboring states, baiting them to coalesce in a war for survival. And of course America, which had just left Iraq in tatters as per your recipe, would be obliged - against the will of US public opinion - to re-intervene to save the Kurdish state.
Much, much more likely, your machinations would have visited a new tragedy upon the Iraqi Kurds. I don't know why you can't at least entertain the possibility.
Your advocacy for withdrawal from Iraq made at least a degree of sense in terms of the negatives involved in the expenditure of blood and treasure (even more so today with our mounting debt problems), but the other aspects of your advocacy, namely, that Iraq going up in flames would be good for America and that the US could both leave Iraq and save the Kurds, simply doesn't measure up.
Finally, I just want to say about our misunderstanding the other day on a thread about Iran, that I never held our disagreement over Iraq against you, that my main opinion of your mettle and your ethics as a person was derived over a different argument, when you gracefully let me off the hook after that ugly exchange we once had years ago about the Palestinians. Both the form and content of my arguments that day were shameful...and you could of excommunicated me from Jihad watch or, if nothing else, never bothered to communicate with me again. Instead, you were - after my expressions of contrition - magnanimous in the extreme. I'll always appreciate that.
Hugh is just than HATER. There was no genocide by Ottoman Empire in WWI as the legal regiquent of International Law at that time.The Allied after WWI wouldnot fine any evident of genocide being order by the Sultan. ChurchHill the idiot thought the Ottoman Empire could be than puch other for the English military the war with the Ottoman Empire would last no longer than afew weeks.The turk where alway white the Monger from Asia where white skin people they only became yellow when they later on married chinese women on a large scale as they where more beautiful than they own women than more submit than they own women.
DefenderofIslam speek the English much good is reelly say intersting thing and help understnding the reel situration. Thanky much.
I won't attempt another defense of myself, based on my own understanding of what, unwaveringly, I have suggested made more sense in Iraq, and in certain parts (the Kurdish-dominated north) of Iraq. But I will take issue with the following phrase: "America, which had just left Iraq in tatters as per your recipe..."
I never said that Iraq had to leave Iraq "in tatters." It only had to leave Iraq. The tatters would come naturally, afterwards, in the slow-motion working-out of enmities and resentments, some ancient, and some much newer. I have confidence that the Islamic view of things encourages aggression, violence, and a belief that one does not compromise, or if one does, it is only in order to bide one's time, to lull the enemy, and then to reassert one's claims, violently, when the time is right and ripe.
For example, whenever the Americans finally leave Iraq, and no one can conceivably say that after allthe enormous efforts and money poured into that place that it is being left "in tatters," I am sure the Sunni Arabs will show themselves unwilling to accept their new status, and their loss of power and money, and the Shi'a will not be willing to give up any of the power they now possess, and both kinds of Arabs -- Shi'a and Sunni -- will not allow the Kurds to keep the level of autonomy they now have grown used to, much less allow them to extend that autonomy to having power over the oilfields in northern Iraq.
I don't think the Americans have to do anything in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Pakistan (save, in the case of the latter, keep a beady eye on you-know-what) except allow the Muslim states to slowlly or rapidly decline, no longer saved by Western money and Western solicitousness of every kind. And that is a way to force Muslims to confront the real causes of their own political, economic, social failures -- to make them connect the dots all the way back to Islam, and what it does to the minds of men.
I essentially agree with your final paragraph, particularly in a longer-term context.
I'm less certain about your convictions regarding a post-withdrawal Iraq. Time will tell.
As for "tatters", if we had left Iraq in 2006-07, when you and I were having this debate, and when the insurgency was in full throttle, there is no other way to look at how events would have unfolded. The Iraqi government had not yet consolidated power...chaos was inevitable. Hardly a ringing endorsement of US commitment as far as the Iraqi Kurds would have been concerned.
PS - I hope all is well. I miss the occasional banter you and Robert used to share on these pages. It seems everyone is a bit more serious these days. I myself have a great deal of trouble getting past the liberalism of the siblings and friends who are otherwise such an important part of my life. When I'm lubricated, it's always easier.
I've come to admire greatly those people who can discuss the issues of the day dispassionately. I wish I were one of them.
Have a great weekend.
(ANSAmed) Ankara, 2/09: 40% of Turkish wives are victims of physical abuse (“slapped, pushed, punched, choked, burnt or threatened or attacked with a weapon such as a knife or gun”) by their husbands and only a fraction report it to authorities, according to an official survey released today and published by daily Hurriyet website.
3/09: Turkey’s Ministry of Education poll: 26% of parents and students believe in honor killing.
This, in the most "moderate" of all muslim nations!
The more muslims there are, the more fundamentalist they become, whether in a neighborhood, a town or a nation.
DefenderofIslam sez:
"There was no genocide by Ottoman Empire in WWI as the legal regiquent of International Law at that time"
I will be happy to give him a clue....and a hint (stay away from drugs)
http://www.armenian-genocide.org/ottoman.html
The piss-poor defenderofislam is a masochist that comes here only to get his ass kicked...