Turks don't apologize. They kill and terrorise to prove they are not guilty of murder or terror 1

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Sep 26, 2010 at 03:09

Caleb writes :

> Ariel Sharon once was asked by a western journalist whether the Israel Defense Forces could not show mercy toward their Palestinian adversaries. The Minister, a blunt-spoken former general, replied "There is no mercy in this part of the world".

Indeed, no mercy and little forgiveness. This is the land of the Blood Feud where old wounds are not allowed to heal, memories not allowed to die and ninety years ago is as yesterday.<

Can you give us the link confirming the quote ? ... you are the most unlikely person to be trusted by anyone who follows this thread, least of all me .

And , besides , according to the valid international law no statutory limitation applies to crimes against humanity perpetrated repeatedly by the Turks and neatly "defined in the Charter of the International Military Tribunal, Nürnberg, of 8 August 1945 and confirmed by resolutions 3 (I) of 13 February 1946 and 95 (I) of 11 December 1946 of the General Assembly of the United Nations , particularly the "grave breaches" enumerated in the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 for the protection of war victims"

including "crimes against humanity whether committed in time of war or in time of peace as they are defined in the Charter of the International Military Tribunal, Nürnberg, of 8 August 1945 and confirmed by resolutions 3 (I) of 13 February 1946 and 95 (I) of 11 December 1946 of the General Assembly of the United Nations, eviction by armed attack or occupation..., and the crime of genocide as defined in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, even if such acts do not constitute a violation of the domestic law of the country in which they were committed." [ Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity ]

Interesting isn't it ? So why this new lie of "the land of the Blood Feud where old wounds are not allowed to heal memories not allowed to die " if what we have to do with here is well defined by the international law which knows no oblivion or forgiveness for genocides which the bloodthirsty and criminal Turk has committed against the Armenians, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Kurds ? Note that denying these genocides and crimes against humanity by the Turk only aggravates his case.

It would be also interesting to learn how this sudden change of tone (vaguely admitting the genocides perpetrated by the Turks but blaming this time either the Israelis or the "environment" for them ) corresponds to imam Erdogan's memorable saying "this country's history is as clean and clear as the sun" and that "There is no genocide in our civilization. Our civilization is the civilization of love, tolerance and brotherhood" ? How can you have history "as clear and clean as the sun" if you implicitly admit you Turks live and act according to the law of the jungle they themselves had brought from Central Asia and Bedouin Islam or as you put it euphemistically according to "the land of the Blood Feud" ?

> But was the Bolshevik Russia of 1920, the Russia of Lenin and Trotsky, the brutal, criminal dictatorship Stalin would later create?<

Aha, where does your staunch anti-communism with which you just a few days ago were buttering up the gullible readers begin ? Not with Lenin ? So Lenin who exterminated millions of people is OK , but Stalin who just continued Lenin's work was bad because he as a Georgian happened to know the Turks better than comrade Ataturk's best friend ? ;) One more amusing thing I'd like to ask in this context. Did the Turks tell their US saviours from communism of this Turkish schizophrenia and didn't they ask the Americans to keep their dirty imperialist hands off good Lenin and his memory while attacking and denigrating the USSR ?

Who do you want to fool with your new lies and ad hoc inventions , Turkish ignoramus ?

> Was National Turkey wrong to accept help from the sole foreign country willing to assist it in redeeming its core territory from foreign occupation? I say no, and no.<

Just for your information, it was not Soviet Russia that first implored Kemal's help but Kemal in person who first sent flattering letters and emissaries to Moscow to get whatever aid he could from comrade Lenin. All his letters are well preserved in Russian archives. It is Kemal that was begging Lenin for help and not vice versa. Furthermore, will you kindly explain what comrade Ataturk promised comrade Lenin in exchange for Soviet gold and guns ? 72 best Turkish virgins in Moslem paradise ?

> By 1920 Mustafa Kemal had willingly renounced all claim to the Arab lands that had been part of Turkey for centuries.<

Really? So why did he occupy the Arab province of Hatay later on ? The Arab lands happened to have rebelled against and expelled the Turk. So Kemal was generous enough to have noticed that and not to anger the British and French by insitence on his fake historical "rights". After all his idea was to betray Lenin and ally himself with the imperialists which he did having secret dealings with the Italians and then signing an official treaty with the French as early as October 20 1921, even though nobody except the Soviets recognized him at that time. The only officially recognized Turkish government resided in Constantinople.

> But this was not enough for the European imperial powers. Victors of the Great War, they already were busily carving up those Ottoman lands in colonies, protectorates and Mandates.<

Just to remind you of another thing, you brainwashed anti-historical Turkish propaganda machine , it was not the 'imperialist' powers that started the war against Turkey but imperialist and jihadist Turkey that declared unilaterally jihad on the Entente in November 1914 ! And the imperialist Turkish objective was to recapture the Balkans and create a huge Pan-Turkic empire stretching from the Adriatic to the upper Syr Daria river. What was Enver doing in Turkestan anyway ? Now let's compare the two plans ! Well, the British plan was modest and progressive compared to the Turkish Pan-Turkic delirium which is still cherished across Turkey !

> Each sought to tear off a piece of Anatolia itself. Defeated Germany was excluded from this confederation of vultures <

It's another Turkish lie. Turkey lost the war which it had unleashed. It signed the Mudros ceasefire which was a valid international treaty in virtue of which the victors had the right to control the implementation of the stipulations of the treaty signed by the Turks. One of the points included occupying the enemy territory of strategic importance . The control included furthermore disarming the enemy army . This was the original mission of Kemal in Eastern Anatolia . The Greeks landed in Smyrna exactly with the same mission entrusted to them by the Entente based on the internationally valid agreements with consent of the only internationally recognized government in Constantinople. The Angora government by Lenin's grace was no government in international sense at all , but a rebel centre. Attacking it the Greeks acted on behalf of the only recognized government of the sultan. Had they won the Turks would have preserved their beloved caliphate instead of trying desperately to recreate after 80 years' interruption. So much for your Turkish fairy tale of "war of independence" which on closer examination turns out to be at best a Kemalist-Bolshevik conspiracy and a jihad and another chapter of the communist-Islamist war on the West !

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".