The Fairness Option

>From the April 25, 2005 issue: Listening to Democrats and reading
editorial commentary, some Americans might think that the three-fifths
Senate vote required to end debate was dictated by James Madison on his
deathbed. Hardly.

The Weekly Standard
04/25/2005
Volume 010, Issue 30
For the Editors

By Philip Terzian

The Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist, and his Republican colleagues,
face a momentous decision: Do they allow the Democratic minority to
prevent the Senate from voting on judicial nominees, or do they invoke
the “nuclear option” — that is, change the rules so a simple majority
of 51 can force a vote?

For the past few months, Frist has been applying public pressure: first,
by routinely complaining about the Democratic filibuster against
President Bush’s nominees for the federal appellate bench; and second,
by suggesting that “all options are on the table.” Frist’s threats have
not impressed Democrats, who see no benefit in curtailing their
obstructionist tactics. From their point of view, talking nominees to
death keeps conservatives out of the federal judiciary, and weakens the
Bush administration. And Democrats argue that changing Senate rules
would injure the spirit of harmony on Capitol Hill.

Excuse us for a moment while we gag over that one. Simply stated, it is
the Democrats who have violated the standards of behavior in this
episode. They have maligned distinguished, well-qualified judges with
whom they disagree as “radical” and “outside the mainstream” of judicial
thought when it is, in fact, the Democrats who hover at the fringes of
extremism. Senate minority leader Harry Reid has a soft voice and
professorial manner, but he is an accomplished name-caller (Alan
Greenspan is “one of the biggest political hacks we have in Washington”)
and seldom hesitates to misrepresent the views of judicial nominees.
It’s impossible to reconcile the ideal of comity with summarily denying
nominees the courtesy of an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor.

That is why Frist needs to concentrate his energies, organize the
majority, and face down the challenge posed by Harry Reid and his
troops. But let’s call this “nuclear option” by its proper name: the
fairness option. Senate Democrats are the ones who have, in effect, gone
nuclear–requiring a supermajority of 60 senators to approve judges.
Listening to Democrats, and reading editorial commentary, Mr. and Mrs.
America might have gained the impression that the three-fifths Senate
vote required to end debate was dictated by James Madison on his
deathbed. Hardly. Cloture is a Senate rule, not a constitutional
requirement. It was President Woodrow Wilson, frustrated by the Senate’s
indulgence of endless talk, who promoted the adoption of Rule XXII,
mandating a two-thirds vote for cloture. Sixty years later, Senate
Democrats, led by Robert Byrd, reduced the two-thirds requirement to
three-fifths. The sacred principle of requiring 60 votes to end a
filibuster is neither an ideal of the Founders nor a historic precedent:
It is a procedural rule less than 30 years old. And, in the long history
of the United States, filibusters have never been used by a minority
systematically to block a president’s judicial nominees.

It is true that the filibuster preserves one option for the minority
against the rule of the majority party, and may allow a minority to
focus the attention of the country on momentous issues before the Senate
acts. But it is also worth noting that this procedure has not always
been used for constructive purposes. In recent times, the filibuster was
used most promiscuously to frustrate civil-rights legislation: In 1957
Strom Thurmond held the floor for 24 hours for that purpose–a record
which still stands — and in 1964, 18 Democrats and one Republican
blocked the Civil Rights Act for two-and-a-half months.

That’s the history. The politics is even more compelling. No Senate
Republican should misunderstand the Democrats’ motive in blocking the
nominations of, among others, Justice Janice Brown of the California
Supreme Court, Judge Henry Saad of the Michigan Court of Appeals, or
Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen: It is power, pure and
simple. These, and other jurists, have been nominated by President Bush,
favorably evaluated by the American Bar Association, have testified
before and been endorsed by the Judiciary Committee, and await final
judgment in the Senate. If the Democrats manage to prevent a vote for
the sake of political obstruction, they will set a precedent more
momentous than a change in Senate rules.

The power of any president, Democrat or Republican, to appoint judges
would then depend not on a formal vote of the Senate, but on the consent
of 40 partisans determined to inflict maximum political damage. So the
stakes for the Bush administration could not be clearer: If Harry Reid
and the Democrats can abuse Senate rules to stop their colleagues from
voting on appellate nominees, Supreme Court appointments will be next on
the list. And which is more important: the right of any president to
appoint federal judges, and the right of nominees to a Senate vote; or
some spurious notion of “comity” on Capitol Hill?

US Fed News
April 21, 2005 Thursday 1:27 AM EST

GOV. SCHWARZENEGGER SIGNS TWO BILLS

SACRAMENTO, Calif.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, R-Calif., issued the following news
release:

Gov. Schwarzenegger has signed the following two bills:

SB 121 by Committee on Local Government – Validations.

SB 424 by Senator Charles Poochigian (R-Fresno) – Armenian Genocide.

See signing message below.

To Members of the California State Senate:

I am signing SB 424 which will permanently recognize April 24th as
the Day of Remembrance of the Armenian Genocide. This bill also
designates the period commencing the Sunday before April 24th and
concluding the following Sunday as the “Days of Remembrance of the
Armenian Genocide.”

Between 1915 and 1923, a systematic and deliberate campaign of
genocide by the Ottoman Turkish government resulted in the deaths of
over 1.5 million Armenians and the exile of a people from their
historic homeland. During this period, tens of thousands of displaced
Armenians took refuge in the United States, many in California. These
survivors embraced this country and this state. Among them and their
descendents emerged leaders in business, agriculture, sports,
academics and the arts. Today, a few survivors remain as a living
testament to the horror that took place 90 years ago. We must
recognize crimes against humanity if we are to prevent them; silence
in the face of genocide effectively encourages those who would commit
such atrocities in the future.

In 1981, President Reagan said, “Like the genocide of the Armenians
before it, and the genocide of the Cambodians which followed it and
like too many other such persecutions of too many other peoples the
lessons of the Holocaust must never be forgotten.” I am proud to
represent the people of the State of California in recognizing the
historical persecution of the Armenian people and join with them in
urging Turkey to acknowledge the fact of Armenian Genocide.

Sincerely,

Arnold Schwarzenegger

Turkey, Armenia and the heavy burden of memories
By Charles Tannock

Taipei Times, Taiwan
April 23 2005

Saturday, Apr 23, 2005,Page 9

All wars end, eventually. But memories of atrocity never seem to
fade, as the government-fanned anti-Japanese riots now taking place
in China remind us. The 90th anniversary of the Armenian massacres
of 1915, ordered by the ruling Young Turks of the Ottoman Empire and
carried out by the Kurds, is another wound that will not heal, but
one that must be treated if Turkey’s progress toward EU membership
is to proceed smoothly.

It is believed that the Armenian genocide inspired the Nazis in their
plans for the extermination of Jews. However, in comparison with the
Holocaust, most people still know little about this dark episode.

Indeed, it is hard for most of us to imagine the scale of suffering
and devastation inflicted on the Armenian people and their ancestral
homelands. But many members of today’s thriving global Armenian
Diaspora have direct ancestors who perished, and carry an oral
historical tradition that keeps the memories burning.

It is particularly ironic that many Kurds from Turkey’s southeastern
provinces, having been promised Armenian property and a guaranteed
place in heaven for killing infidels, were willingly complicit in
the genocide. They later found themselves on the losing end of a
long history of violence between their own separatist forces and
the Turkish army, as well as being subjected to an ongoing policy of
discrimination and forced assimilation.

Historically, the ancient Christian Armenians were amongst the most
progressive people in the East, but in the 19th century Armenia was
divided between the Ottoman Empire and Russia. Sultan Abdulhamit
II organized the massacres of 1895 to 1897 but it was not until the
spring of 1915, under the cover of World War I, that the Young Turks’
nationalistic government found the political will to execute a true
genocide.

Initially, Armenian intellectuals were arrested and executed in
public hangings in groups of 50 to 100. Ordinary Armenians were thus
deprived of their leaders, and soon after were massacred, with many
burned alive.

Approximately 500,000 were killed in the last seven months of 1915,
with the majority of the survivors deported to desert areas in Syria,
where they died from either starvation or disease. It is estimated
that 1.5 million people perished.

Recently, the Armenian Diaspora has been calling on Turkey to
face-up to its past and recognize its historic crime. Turkey’s
official line remains that the allegation is based on unfounded or
exaggerated claims, and that the deaths that occurred resulted from
combat against Armenians collaborating with invading Russian forces
during World War I, or as a result of disease and hunger during the
forced deportations. Moreover, the local Turkish population allegedly
suffered similar casualties.

Turkey thus argues that the charge of genocide is designed to besmirch
Turkey’s honor and impede its progress towards EU accession. There are
also understandable fears that diverging from the official line would
trigger a flood of compensation claims, as occurred against Germany.

For many politicians, particularly in the US, there is an unwillingness
to upset Turkey without strong justification, given its record as a
loyal NATO ally and putative EU candidate country.

But, despite almost half a century of membership in the Council of
Europe — ostensibly a guardian of human rights, including freedom
of speech and conscience — Turkey still punishes as a crime against
national honor any suggestion that the Armenian genocide is an historic
truth. Fortunately, this article of Turkey’s penal code is now due
for review and possible repeal.

Indeed, broader changes are afoot in Turkey. The press and government,
mindful of the requirements of EU membership, are finally opening
the sensitive Armenian issue to debate. Even Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan, under increasing EU pressure as accession negotiations
are due to begin this October, has agreed to an impartial study by
academic historians, although he has reiterated his belief that the
genocide never occurred.

In France, the historical occurrence of the Armenian genocide is
enshrined in law, and denial of its occurrence is regarded in the
same way as Holocaust denial.

The European Parliament is pressing for Turkish recognition of
the Armenian genocide. It is also calling for an end to the trade
embargo by Turkey and its close ally Azerbaijan against the Republic
of Armenia, a reopening of frontiers, and a land-for-peace deal to
resolve the territorial dispute over Nagorno Karabakh in Azerbaijan
and safeguard its Armenian identity.

Armenia, an independent country since 1991, remains dependent on
continued Russian protection, as was the case in 1920 when it joined
the Soviet Union rather than suffer further Turkish invasion. This
is not healthy for the development of Armenia’s democracy and weak
economy. Nor does Armenia’s continued dependence on Russia bode well
for regional co-operation, given deep resentment of Russian meddling
in neighboring Georgia and Azerbaijan.

There is only one way forward for Turkey, Armenia, and the region.
The future will begin only when Turkey — like Germany in the past and
Serbia and Croatia now — repudiates its policy of denial and faces up
to its terrible crimes of 1915. Only then can the past truly be past.

Charles Tannock is chairman of the European Parliament’s Human Rights
Committee.

Institute for War and Peace Reporting
(CRS No. 283, 21-Apr-05)

Armenia: a Spring Awakening?
First rumblings of the contest to be the next Armenian president.
By Susanna Petrosian in Yerevan

After a lull of a year, Armenia’s domestic politics are livening
up again. New opposition movements are being formed and the speaker
of parliament is showing signs of political ambition.

For the moment, though, these political stirrings – both by emerging
groups and established opposition parties – have largely left the
public unmoved. According to Natalya Martirosian, coordinator of
the Armenian office of the Helsinki Citizens Assembly, a new group
calling itself Bekum, or Breakthrough, could emerge as a potent force
for change.

“The creation of Bekum is one of the potential steps towards change
in this country,” she told IWPR.

Bekum was set up by a number of non-government organisations, NGOs,
which want to see swifter progress towards a civil society.

At the beginning of April, another group called the National League for
Armenian Independence was formed, with the declared aim of opposing any
political decision that it believes poses a threat to the country’s
independence. The group pledged to use all constitutional means to
ensure that “passive social protest becomes active”.

There has been a marked revival in the activity of mainstream
opposition parties, too. The opposition New Times and Republic Party
both held conferences recently, while the Justice bloc held a forum
at which there were calls for the resignation of the administration
of President Robert Kocharian.

Aram Karapetian, leader of the New Times party and an unsuccessful
candidate in the 2003 presidential election, believes that the
evolutionary approach is not working and the only way forward is
the kind of peaceful revolution that occurred in Georgia, Ukraine
and Kyrgyzstan.

“I am sure that we will succeed in uniting the dissatisfied masses,
pressure from which will force the government to step down. Victory
is inevitable,” said Karapetian.

The leader of the Republic Party, former prime minister Aram Sarksian,
voiced similar views, “In Armenia, we have reached a situation where we
need not just a change of power, but revolution. Many people agree with
this, and we need only to get together at a certain time and place.

“A nationwide revolution will take place unexpectedly – and not one
window pane will be broken.”

Leaders of the nine-party parliamentary faction Justice are taking a
less radical position. They believe that the government can still be
removed by constitutional means, with the best option being to hold
a national referendum expressing no confidence in the president.

“We favour a calm and peaceful solution to events,” said Justice
faction secretary Viktor Dallakian.

For the moment, President Kocharian appears more secure than his
counterparts in other parts of the former Soviet Union. He is three
years away from the end of his second and final presidential term in
2008. To achieve the kind of national ballot it wants, the opposition
would have to get parliament – with its pro-government majority –
to agree amendments to the law governing referendums.

The opposition has been boycotting sessions of parliament for more than
a year. Despite this, opposition deputies make monthly statements and
are given a small amount of airtime once a week on national television.

Pro-government politicians say the current opposition poses them
no threat. “There will be no outside-inspired revolution in Armenia
because, unlike other former Soviet republics, Armenia cannot create
problems for the superpowers,” said Galust Saakian, leader of the
Republican Party of Armenia faction, a pro-government group (not to
be confused with the Republic party).

“Both the opposition and the government will be careful not to erase
15 years of statehood for the sake of satisfying the great powers
and other dubious forces,” said Prime Minister Andrannik Margarian
robustly.

Government supporters say Armenia lacks the same kind of problems that
made revolutions possible in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan. Moreover,
they believe a prerequisite for this kind of revolution is the catalyst
provided by elections, which in Armenia’s case are more than two
years away.

“It’s highly unlikely that there’ll be a new scenario in Armenia,”
said Samvel Nikoyan, a pro-government member of parliament.

Kocharian was in confident mood when he spoke to students in Yerevan
on April 11, telling them, “I call on the opposition to stop worrying
about the fact that they are weak and have achieved nothing. They
have achieved nothing because the country and government is better.”

However, some observers reading the political runes in Armenia say
they see signs of nervousness at the top, and even the start of a
campaign to succeed Kocharian from inside the ruling elite.

At the end of March, Kocharian was invited to Paris by French president
Jacques Chirac. But for the first time in his seven-year presidency,
Kocharian declined an invitation to go abroad.

Although official sources cited a leg injury as the reason, the
opposition press wrote that the president had no health problems,
so there was speculation that the delay had a political rather than
a medical cause. The Armenian president finally left for France on
April 20.

His trip took place just as National Assembly speaker Artur Bagdasarian
– whose position makes him the second most senior official in Armenia’s
hierarchy – was making his presence felt.

Two weeks ago, an article written by Bagdasarian appeared in the press,
discussing the need to hold democratic presidential and parliamentary
elections in Armenia.

Many observers believe that Bagdasarian’s article is essentially a
pre-election political manifesto. “The revolution has already begun:
read Bagdasarian’s article carefully,” said opposition leader Aram
Sarkisian. Bagdasarian’s Orinats Yerkir or Country of Law party has
also been courting other parties, including opposition groups.

Even some of Bagdasarian’s colleagues from the ruling coalition say the
speaker is beginning an election campaign. “He has turned parliament
into an election headquarters,” said Galust Saakian.

Bagdasarian recently made a high-profile trip to Moscow, where he
discussed economic matters with Russia’s minister of transport and
the co-chairman of the Armenia-Russia intergovernmental commission,
even though these issues are the business of the government rather
than parliament.

With Kocharian’s return from France, political commentators are
waiting for the next episode in this slowly evolving political drama.

Susanna Petrosian is a journalist with Noyan Tapan news agency.

Eccidio armeni: 90 anni fa l’inizio della tragedia

SDA – Servizio di base in Italiano
April 22, 2005

IEREVAN, 22 apr — Novant’anni fa, nel 1915, cominciavano nell’impero
ottomano i massacri e le deportazioni della popolazione armena, che
in tre anni avrebbero provocato 1,3 milioni di vittime, secondo gli
armeni, tra 250.000 e 500.000 secondo le autorita’ turche.

Nella capitale dell’Armenia, Ierevan, e in altri paesi il genocidio
viene commemorato ogni anno il 24 aprile, anniversario dell’arresto di
migliaia di leader della comunita’ sospettati di sentimenti ostili
nei confronti del governo di Costantinopoli, dominato dal partito
ultranazionalista dei Giovani Turchi (Ittihad ve Terraki, Unione
e Progresso).

La repressione in realta’ era cominciata alla fine dell’Ottocento,
quando gli armeni – una minoranza cristiana che guardava all’Occidente
– costituirono comitati rivoluzionari per lottare contro il giogo
ottomano, che durava dal XVI/o secolo. Secondo fonti armene, tra il
1894 e il 1909, l’esercito massacro 200.000 persone. Gli eccidi,
secondo le stesse fonti, furono ordinati prima del sultano Abdul Hamid
II e poi dal governo dei Giovani Turchi, che prese il potere nel 1909.

Indeboliti dalla sconfitta nella guerra dei Balcani, nel febbraio
1914 gli ottomani, su pressione dei paesi occidentali, si impegnarono
ad avviare riforme per tutelare le minoranze etniche e religiose. Ma,
nell’ottobre dello stesso anno, entrarono nella Prima guerra mondiale,
a fianco della Germania e dell’impero austro-ungarico.

Poche settimane dopo gli arresti di massa dei leader armeni, nel
maggio 1915 una legge speciale autorizzo le deportazioni “per motivi
di sicurezza interna” di tutti i “gruppi sospetti”. La popolazione
armena di Anatolia e di Cilicia, additata come “il nemico interno”,
fu deportata verso i deserti della Mesopotamia. Durante l’esodo
forzato molti morirono di stenti e malattie o furono uccisi da
guerrieri curdi al servizio degli ottomani. Altri morirono nei campi
dove furono confinati. Altri riuscirono a fuggire in Occidente.

“Il diritto degli armeni di vivere e lavorare sul territorio della
Turchia e’ completamente abolito”, scrisse nel settembre dello stesso
anno il ministro dell’interno Talaat ai governatori delle province.
L’operazione di ‘pulizia etnica’ aveva un doppio obiettivo: occupare le
terre appartenenti agli armeni, situate tra la Turchia e il Caucaso,
e togliere alla minoranza cristiana qualsiasi illusione su eventuali
riforme. Nel 1920, dopo la dura sconfitta nella prima guerra mondiale,
l’impero ottomano fu smantellato. Nel maggio 1918 era stato istituito
uno stato armeno, inglobato nell’Unione sovietica.

La Turchia non riconosce il termine di “genocidio”, ma ammette che
furono commessi massacri e che molti armeni persero la vita durante le
deportazioni. Secondo Ankara si tratto tuttavia di repressione contro
una popolazione di rivoltosi che collaborava con l’allora nemico
numero uno, la Russia zarista, durante la prima guerra mondiale. Gli
eredi degli ottomani denunciano anche che, tra il 1915 e il 1922,
circa 523.000 turchi furono uccisi da bande armene.

Il genocidio armeno fu riconosciuto, il 29 agosto 1985, dalla
sottocommissione dei diritti umani dell’Onu, poi, il 18 giugno 1987,
dal Parlamento europeo. Il medesimo passo e’ stato fatto nel gennaio
2001 dalla Francia, dove vive la comunita’ armena piu’ numerosa
(350.000 persone), dalla Svizzera (Consiglio nazionale, dicembre
2003), dal Belgio (1998) e dalla Grecia (2003). In Russia, la Duma
ha condannato il genocidio nel 1994. Oggi nel mondo vivono quattro
milioni e mezzo di armeni.

La tragedia armena rimane un motivo di attrito e di polemiche tra
la Turchia e l’Armenia. Nei giorni scorsi Ankara ha suggerito di
istituire una commissione congiunta d’inchiesta per far luce una
volta per tutte sulla vicenda ma Ierevan – appoggiata dall Russia,
sua storica protettrice – ha respinto in modo categorico la proposta.

The PLANNED, ORGANIZED, and EXECUTED GENOCIDE of the ARMENIANS
by Jack Manuelian

PanArmenian News
March 27 2005

Were the plans of the 1915-23 Armenian Genocide actually drawn up and
were in place by the year 1910 or 1912? According to some sources
definitely yes.

There is the book “Inner Folds of the Ottoman Revolution” written by
Mevlan Zadeh Rifat and published in 1929, the author, a pro-sultan
Turk, claims that the “Armenian genocide was decided in August 1910
and October 1911, by a Young Turk committee composed entirely of
displaced Balkan Jews in the format of a syncretist Jewish-Muslim
sect which included Talaat, Enver, Behaeddin Shakir, Jemal, and Nizam
posting as Muslims. It met in the Rothschild-funded Grand Orient
loge/hotel of Salonika.” Syncretism means a combination of different
forms of belief or practice; masonism fits that description.

A 1994 conference paper/lecture by Joseph Brewda of Schiller
Institute entitled “Palmerson launches Young Turks to permanently
control Middle East ” claims the founder of the Young Turks to be a
certain Jew by the name of Emmanuel Carasso. He states: “Carasso set
up the Young Turk secret society in the 1890s in Salonika, then part
of Turkey, and now part of Greece. Carasso was also the grand master
of an Italian masonic lodge there, called ‘Macedonia Resurrected.’
The lodge was the headquarters of the Young Turks, and all the top
Young Turk leadership were members.”

Further on Mr. Brewda says: “During the Young Turk regime, Carasso
continued to play a leading role. He met with the sultan, to tell him
that he was overthrown. He was in charge of putting the sultan under
house arrest. He ran the Young Turk intelligence network in the
Balkans. And he was in charge of all food supplies in the empire
during World War I.” It is ironic that five centuries after the
Turkish sultans welcomed the expelled European Jews into Turkey,
certain Jews belonging to secret societies and to Zionism will kick
the sultan out of power early in 20th century, destroy the Ottoman
Empire, and celebrate their victory by massacring by proxy almost the
whole Christian Armenian people, one million and half Armenians; half
million Greeks; and half million Christian Assyrians & Arameans.
In 1982, after the Israeli army conquered Lebanon, they celebrated
their victory by massacring by proxy children and women in the
Palestinian camp of Shattila, in Lebanon, by allowing Lebanise
Phalange militia fighters to move into the camp for two days and
murder its inhabitants. Eighty percent of the camp were killed.
Nearly all of the dead were old men, women and children and all of
them had been unarmed. Not one gun, not one knife was found in their
possession, claims a Palestinian witness.
All this according to the percepts of the Talmud, the Satanic Bible
of the Jews, which encourages Jews to kill, directly or indirectly,
by sayings like: “Every Jew who spills the blood of the godless, is
doing the same as making a sacrifice to God.” Talmud: Bammidber Raba
c21 & Jalkut 772. In the eyes of Tamudists all non-Jews are godless.
And “It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The
Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah.” Talmud: Coschen
Hamischpat, Hagah 425. Very neatly put sentence indeed.

Mr. Brewda writes: “Another important area was the press. While in
power, the Young Turks ran several newspapers, including ‘The Young
Turk,’ whose editor was none other than the Russian Zionist leader
Vladimir Jabotinsky. Jabotinsky had been educated as a young man in
Italy.”

Mr. Brewda, ignoring the possibility that Talaat could have been a
secret infiltrated Jew, writes: “Of course, there were also some
Turks who helped lead the Young Turk movement. For example, Talaat
Pasha. Talaat was the interior minister and dictator of the regime
during World war I. He had been a member of Carasso’s Italian masonic
lodge in Salonika. One year prior to the 1908 coup, Talaat became the
grand master of the Scottish Rite Masons in the Ottoman Empire. If
you go to the [archives of] Scottish Rite headquarters in Washington,
D.C., you can find that most of the Young Turk leaders were officials
in the Scottish Rite.”

Mr. Brewda also mentions the novel “Greenmantle,” whose hero is a
British spy who led the Young Turks, and that the book’s author, John
Buchan, later identified the novel’s hero as the English nobleman
Aubrey Herbert, who was the top British spy master in the Middle East
during WW I. And that Lawrence of Arabia later identified Herbert as
having been, at one time, the head of the Young Turks. According to
Mr. Brewda, Carasso also appears in that novel under the name
Carusso.
By 1916 the British and French, overpowered by greed, already had a
secret agreement to divide the Ottoman Empire between themselves.
Presently Hitler’s “Mien Kempt ” anti-semitic book is a best-seller
in Turkey, it is published by various Turkish publishers by thousands
and thousands. Are the Turks finally waking up and realizing that
their Sultan’s refusal to grant Palestine to the Zionist Jews as a
homeland had cost them their centuries-old empire?

Talaat was a living witness to the Genocide and history.

He should not have been assassinated. His silencing for good by
hot-tempered Armenians only served those who planned and executed the
Genocide. Had he been left alone, who knows he might have confessed
everything at his old age or at his deathbed.
Another source is the lengthy article “The Armenian & Jewish Genocide
Project: Eliminating Ethnic Conflict Along the Oil Route From Baku to
the Suez Canal Region ” written by Clifford Shack and posted in his
web-site.

Mr. Shack writes: “In the 1880’s, the French branch of the Rothschild
family acquired interests in Russia’s Baku oil fields in an effort to
supply their refinery on the Adriatic with cheap Russian oil. In
exchange for these interests they built a railroad linking Baku to
the newly acquired Black Sea port of Batum. This opened up the Baku
oil, a major world supply, to the world. With the success of the new
railroad, the Rothschilds had more oil than they could actually sell.
Overcoming their fear of competing with the giant Standard oil [of
USA], they sought out the huge [Far East] markets east of Suez.”

Further on Mr. Shack makes his point: “The decision by the shrewd
French Rothschild branch to diversify into other areas of oil
exploitation was, presumably, a calculated one. Three years after
they joined Royal Dutch, production at Baku would come to an abrupt
halt in 1905. Although shaken by political activity, the principal
disruption was due to the violence of the ethnic conflict between the
region’s Muslims and the minority population of Armenians who are
Christians. This ethnic conflict caused the first interruption of oil
distribution to the world market. Standard oil was quick to supplant
the needs of the effected markets as its source was operating under
the blanket of peace. The Royal/Dutch/Shell Group (and the Nobles)
watched their Baku investments go up in flames. Ethnic conflict was
at the root of the matter. It could be safely assumed that they were
taking measures to eliminate the possibility of that happening in the
future.” Oil corporations seem to have learned their lessons from
history because before the construction of present-day Baku-Ceyhan
pipeline has began, someone has made sure that no Armenians were left
in Baku anymore. Although the Armenian threat to that pipeline has
been neutralized, yet there is still a Turkish ultra-nationalist
revival threat, and a threat from Iran if Iran comes under attack
from USA or Israel. There is a very clean prophecy of Nostradamus
stating: “By firepower of armies, not far from the Black Sea, he will
come from Persia/Iran to occupy Trebizond.” Trebizond is located at
the shore of the Black Sea and its occupation will virtually cut the
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline in half. Another prophecy of Nostradamus
reads: “Toward Persia/Iran a sizable army of a million. The serpent
Satan invading Byzantium and Egypt.” Byzantium & Egypt could be a
mystical name for modern Istanbul as Sodom & Egypt is the mystical
name given for Jerusalem in the book Revelation 11:8.

Mr. Shack notes that “the mere elimination of the Armenian population
of Baku would not solve the problem of ethnic conflict in that
region. The surrounding areas would provide reservoir effect in
resupplying the conflicting minority element.” And he asks: “was the
removal [in 1915-23] of a small minority like the Armenians [from
historical Armenia] a fair price to pay for the peace in a region so
crucial to the development and investment of the Far East?”
Apparently Mr. Shack ignores the factor of revenge raging in the
heart of human beasts.

Mr. Shacks answers his own question by stating in his article about
the big business or big corporations: “It would be fair to say that
the genocide of a group of a million or so, to serve the benefit of a
billion or so [in the Far East], is less of a question of should it
be done, than how it could be done. So as not to reveal any plausible
motive which could link the actual planners to the genocide, the
scheme involved a proxy party [namely the muslim Turks, Kurds &
Azeris] , which was manipulated through layers of influence,
providing sufficient cover for the planners.”

The fool said in his ignorance, “There was no planned and organized
and executed genocide of the Armenians.”

In chapter 30 of the book of Isaiah we read God speaking by His
prophet: “Woe to the rebellious children, who execute a plan, but not
Mine, and make an alliance, but not of My Spirit, in order to add sin
to sin;…For this is a rebellious people, false sons, sons who
refuse to listen to the instruction of the Lord.”

P.S. For Joseph Brewda’s article go to : SchillerInstitute.org then
put the name of the author or title of his article in the search tab
of the web-site of the institute. For Clifford Shack’s article put
his name in the search tap of Yahoo in order to find his web-site
where his article is posted.

John Buchan’s novel “Greenmantle” is available from Amazon.com. The
Turkish book “Inner Folds of the Ottoman Revolution” has no known
English translation. It was translated into Armenian in 1939 in
Beirut, Lebanon, by Donigian Press.

Jack Manuelian is the author of the book “Nostradamus: Predictions of
World War III” ISBN: 0938294520.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

ANSA English Media Service
April 21, 2005

TURKEY: MILITARY TO BOYCOTT EU IF PRESSURE CONTINUES

ANKARA

By Lucio Leante

(ANSA) – ANKARA, April 21 – The Turkish military threatened
to withdraw its support for the country’s accession to the
European Union (EU), if European pressure for further Turkish
concessions on sensitive issues result in actions that are
unacceptable and outrageous for the Turkish people.

Issues mentioned by the military, the guardian of democracy
and the legacy of modern Turkey founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk,
included the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) terrorist group, Cyprus
and the so-called Armenian genocide of 1915.

The Turkish military general staff, headed by General Hilmi
Ozkok, has never been very supportive of Turkey’s bid to join
the 25-nation union.

That was the gist of a lengthy speech Gen. Ozkok delivered to
students at the Istanbul Military Academy on Wednesday.

“Not only the EU has the right to say Yes or No. Turkey can
do that as well,” Ozkok said in a crucial point of his address
in which he criticised the U.S. for not keeping its promise to
stop PKK’s activity in north Iraq.

Ozkok also expressed dissatisfaction with the EU for acting
as mediator to PKK’s requests hidden under the disguise of human
rights and although the U.S. and the EU had included PKK in
their list of terrorist organisations.

Ozkok criticised European countries for demanding from Turkey
new steps after having failed to keep their promise to end the
international isolation of the Turkish Republic of Northern
Cyprus (TRNC) as a reward for the Turkish Cypriots’ support for
the Annan plan for the reunification of the island.

The Turkish military general staff called on Armenia to give
up its demand for Ankara to admit the Ottoman massacres of
Armenians were genocide. Armenia’s request is openly backed by
the European Parliament (EP) and more cautiously supported by
the European Commission (EC) and the Council of Ministers.

Referring to the recent recommendations on behalf of European
Commission chairman Jose Manuel Barroso that Turkey had to
maintain good relations with Athens, Ozkok determinedly claimed
the Greek defence policy was mainly aimed at thwarting a
presumed “Turkish menace” and that Greek military costs were
still to high.

The political meaning of Ozkok’s speech is clear, according
to analysts: the Turkish army is striving to demonstrate it is
still capable of relying upon the great decisions made in the
country and of better synchronising with the nation’s opinion
than the government. According to many people, the latter seems
ready to pay any price for reaching by October its goal for a
start of accession talks with the EU.

A renowned analyst said Ozkok had been sage enough to assume
such a position after Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan stated last
week there were European circles, trying to divide Turkey and
accused those “circles” of fomenting the spiral between Kurdish
and Turksih nationalism in order to debilitate the requests of
Turkey for EU integration. With this regard, Ozkok is most
probably trying to prove the strategic unity of the Turkish
leadership, also in order to avoid the usual European
accusations of an excessive influence of the army on Turkish
policy. (ANSA).

MINERS KILLED

Daily Post (Liverpool)
April 21, 2005, Thursday

TWO miners have died in a rock fall at a gold mine in north-eastern
Armenia.

The miners died on Monday at the Mergadzor gold mine some 40 miles
north of the capital, Yerevan.

One of the miners was killed on the spot and the other died on the
way to hospital

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

RIA OREANDA
Economic News
April 21, 2005 Thursday

The Armenian 1915-23 genocide issue can reflect on the Turkey-EU
talks

Yerevan. On Sunday, Armenia will pay respects to the 1.5 million
people killed from 1915 to1923, which it considers the result of a
genocide against the Armenians conducted by the Ottoman Empire.
Armenia thinks that the Ottoman empire was exterminating Armenians
during and after World War One, and that the modern Turkey must
acknowledge the actions of the Ottoman Empire as genocide: Turkey
rejects the fact of genocide, asserting that the Armenians killed in
the war, in the course of which many Turks were also killed.

The controversy surrounding this issue has been going on for a long
time, but the fact that Ankara will start talks on joining the EU on
October 3 has put the issue into the center of the European political
arena. I have no doubt that the genocide issue will be on the agenda
of the EU talks, said the Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian.

Of course we would like for the EU to make it a condition for the
joining by Turkey for it to acknowledge the genocide, he added. Some
European politicians, in particular in France, where around 400 000
Armenian immigrants live, share this point of view.

Armenia thinks that is matter of national security to make Turkey
accept the fact of genocide. If Turkey does not accept the fact of
genocide and does not accept that it was wrong, we will not be able
to trust our neighbor, which commands a large military force,
Oksanian said. Turkey has the second-largest army in NATO, after the
United States, Reuters reports.

Ankara has not had diplomatic relations with Yerevan and in 1993
closed its border with Armenia, in protest of the occupation by
Armenia of Nagorny Karabakh territory which earlier formed part of
Azerbaijan. Russian supplied Armenia with a military contingent
numbering 5000 people for help in the patrolling of Turkish-Armenian
border. At the same time the Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict increased
the tension in its relations with Turkey, which takes part in
training of Azeri troops.

Chirac calls on Armenian president to improve ties with Turkey

Agence France Presse — English
April 22, 2005 Friday 6:44 PM GMT

PARIS April 22 — French President Jacques Chirac urged Armenia Friday
to improve its ties with Turkey, the country Yerevan blames for the
genocide of hundred of thousands of its people 90 years ago.

“The president asked President (Robert) Kocharian (of Armenia) about
the development of his dialogue with Turkey” in particular on the
genocide issue, a French presidential spokesman said after a meeting
between the two leaders.

The two men hald talks for an hour before leaving the Elysee Palace
to lay a wreath at a paris monument commemorating the victims of the
massacre, conducted under the Ottoman empire.

Chirac “hoped that Armenia would develop this dialogue with Turkey with
a view to improving relations” with Ankara, the spokesman said, and
encouraged Kocharian “to look for elements of improvement with Turkey.”

He pointed out that French support for Turkish membership of the
European Union was conditional on Ankara’s sharing the values of
the EU, and membership “naturally required a duty of remembrance”
on the genocide issue, the spokesman said.

The talks also touched on the disputed Caucasus enclave of
Nagorno-Karabakh, where long-simmering tensions have flared recently,
sparking fears that the escalation of hostilities along a ceasefire
line between Armenian and Azeri forces could lead to a new war.

Armenia has controlled Karabakh and seven surrounding regions which
make up 14 percent of Azerbaijan’s internationally recognized territory
since the two former Soviet republics ended large-scale hostilities
with a ceasefire in 1994.

Chirac said that “France was very attached to a lasting solution of
the problem and supports the principles of settlement that have been
worked out,” the spokesman said.

The two presidents discussed the idea of staging an ” Armenian cultural
year in France” in 2007.

Armenia will this weekend mark the 90th anniversary of what it calls
the genocide perpetrated between 1915 and 1917.

Some 1.5 million people may have died in the massacres, though Ankara
puts the figure at between 250,000 and half a million.

The French parliament adopted a controversial law in 2001 which states
that “France publicly recognises the Armenian genocide.”

France has a large community of Armenians, estimated at around 400,000.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress