Tall Armenian Tale


The Other Side of the Falsified Genocide


  Exchange Between a Turk and an Armenian Apologist  
First Page


Major Players
Links & Misc.



Mahmut Ozan
Edward Tashji
Sam Weems
If there is one thing I've tried to do with this web site, it's to find the best of what the Armenians and their supporters have to throw out, proving their genocide allegations. Almost always, that's what such "evidence" winds up deserving: to get thrown out. All we need do in this debate is concern ourselves with cold, hard facts... of which the Armenian side has very little of. (One of which is the likely nonexistent "Hitler Quote," which this following Armenian supporter, Mr. Harry Horowitz, cannot resist throwing out. Sigh. What WOULD the Armenians and their supporters do without that quote?)

(Excuse me, that's Harold Horowitz. Two actual Harry Horowitzes from American culture are a Jewish-American gangster — "Gyp the Blood" — and "Moe" from "The Three Stooges.")

Could the letter have come from an Armenian? (There are many mistakes in the letter, which are generally atypical of an intelligent Jewish-American... but very common among certain roughneck Armenian-Americans — judging by their contributions in guestbooks and publicly made available hate letters/death threats — who are possessed by the genocide topic. However, on the other side of the equation, the writer sounds "friendly" and somewhat reasonable, which might indicate he may not be of Armenian origin, after all.) In guestbook forums, I notice many Armenians take on Jewish monikers. I guess they feel this is a sort of poetic justice, as anti-Semitism runs rampant among so many "Aryan" Armenians. Isn't that ironic... since they are so desperate to link themselves with the plight of the ultimate-genocide sufferers?)

(Of course, one might argue the ultimate genocide-sufferers are those who actually got totally wiped out, in relatively contemporary times... like the Tasmanians... that apologists who raise their voices the loudest in sympathy for the Armenians never care about.  But that's another topic.)


The following was found here, dated Aug 12, 2001... entitled, "Here Is A Typical Armenian Apologist Who Thinks Armenians Can
Never Do Wrong And Turkish Suffering is News To Him";
the visitor may wish to travel to the above link to get the exact wording of Mr. Horowitz's letter.

In his letter, Harold Horowitz expressed sorrow that Mr. Kirlikovali's grandparents suffered in the Balkans. He then goes on to blame Enver Pasha for sending the German ships Goeben and Breslau (flying the Turkish flag) for having entered W.W.I at the cost of so many Muslim lives... unaware that even Henry Morgenthau had his ghostwriter report in "Ambassador Morgenthau's Story"  that the attack came as a complete surprise to the Turkish leadership. (Minister of the Marine, Jemal Pasha, had no knowledge of the German attack.)

Mr. Horowitz then faults Mr. Kirlikovali for neglecting to mention German wartime archives or the "photographic documentation of the Armenian genocide captured on plates by A.T. Wegner." He makes a point of mentioning Hitler's alleged quote ("Who remembers the Armenians?").

Mr. Horowitz indicates no patience for a "pseudo-debate about historic facts," which are so obvious to his mind in German reports with words translated to mean "set to annihilate the Armenian race." He makes no mention as to why these Germans, reading the same reports popularized by Morgenthau and Bryce and generally far removed from the scenes, should serve as such authoritative proof.

He points to a book that is misspelled as "German Responsability in the Armenian Genocide," written by Vahakn Dadrian. Harold Horowitz ends his letter by writing, "There's no point in denying the well established fact of the Armenian Genocide."


Holdwater note:

Estimates of the Ottoman-Armenian population: M. Zarchesi, French Consul at Van: 1,300,000; Francis de Pressence (1895): 1,200,000; Torumnekize (1900): 1,300,000; Lynch (1901): 1,158,484; Ottoman census (1905): 1,294,851; British Blue Book (1912): 1,056,000; L.D.Conterson (1913): 1,400,000; French Yellow Book: 1,475,000; Armenian Patriarch Ormanian: (*)1,579,000; Lepsius: 1,600,000

Estimates of the Ottoman-Armenian population

Who translated the German in those "hundreds of German reports"? ("Hundreds"? There were "hundreds" of reports by Germans fixated on what was happening to the Armenians, with pressing war issues that demanded their attention?) If the translator was Vahakn Dadrian, who is familiar enough with the language to do the translating, buyer beware. Especially if words like "annihilate" were used. Look up what "annihilate" means, and then see what happened to the Armenians. If a million survived, as the Armenians claim, subtract from the pre-existing population figures from neutral sources. Then why would a German use the word "annihilate"? Either such a person has information that is hopelessly unreliable, or... more likely... that person has an agenda.

The most incriminating German sources Armenians and their bedfellows like to quote happened to be an ambassador, and a consul... men who relied on outside reports, without seeing things firsthand... exactly like their counterparts, the biased American Ambassador Henry "Holier-than-Thou" Morgenthau, and the U.S. consuls. As Christians, perhaps the hearts of such men went out to the Armenians, hearing story after horror story from the missionaries and Armenians. Who knows? Otherwise, how could they conclude the Armenians were annihilated, or were set to be annihilated... when even the high command of the German military, Liman von Sanders, testified at the trial of Talat Pasha's assassin that he never came across an order for genocide? It would have been he to come across such an order, not the out-of-the-way German diplomats.

Why would Mr. Horowitz desire to refer to what could at least be a potentially biased source of information (to the uninformed but still intelligent mind) as the Armenian, Vahakn Dadrian, as a purveyor of God-honest information? It's nasty... Mr. Horowitz  reads one biased Dadrian book, and then sniffs, "There's no point in denying the well established fact of the Armenian Genocide." Who does Mr. Horowitz think he is, Robert Jay Lifton?

I could not be sure whether the errors above originated with Mr. Horowitz, or with whomever posted it on the Internet. There are similar errors in the reply.

Spelling and grammatical errors are a two-way street... and these aren't always because the writer is necessarily a lunkhead. Naturally, in the case of Turks, their general lack of mastery of the "universal language" of English often comes with not being native speakers.... a criterion that has often left them behind in the genocide debate.)


  You are lucky, because you lived to tell about it. My grandparents were not as lucky as you

 Dear Mr. Horowitz,

When I write about the allegations of genocide, I know I can not change the minds of those who have a vested interest in believing Armenian allegations. Let me make it very clear: Was there suffering? Yes! Was there killing? Yes! Was there brutality? Yes! But on both sides! It was a civil war within a world war which is why it can not be classified as genocide. Placing Armenian allegations of genocide right next to the very true, very gruesome, very real Jewish suffering, uniquely termed Holocaust, is an insult to the suffering of more than 6 million Jews. Make no mistake about it! Showing Turks all bad, all guilty, and the Armenians all white, all victims, is untrue, unfair, unethical, and un-American.

You say "...Had the Union and Progress' Anwar Pasha kept his ambitions at bay, not sending the Schlachtshiff Goeben and Breslau to the ment of Sebastopol with Turkish flag on both ships' masts, Turkey wouldn't have entered the WW1 which cost millions of Muslim lives (the 4 to 1 ratio you're mentioning). "

First, knowing full well the Russian, British, and French competition and grand design over prized Turkish lands in the preceding 2 centuries, I am afraid, I am unable to agree with you. Ottoman would be attacked, like it was in the cases of Greece (1822-1830), Egypt (1840), Serbia, Macedonia, and Romania (in 1877) and Bulgaria (1908). None of those attacks on Ottoman lands were provoked... They all came as a part of greater plant to divide and rule the Ottoman Empire... It would be naive to assume that if Ottomans did not provoke, they would stay out of war...

Second, my ratio of 4:1 is for Eastern Anatolia only, where the Armenians claim there were annihilated!... If you look at the whole WWl, Turkish casualties are much higher...

You say "...In your long message I failed to see however, neither a single word about German wartime archives, nor about photographic documentation of the Armenian genocide captured on plates by A.T. Wegner; the German medical officer serving in Turkish army during the course of genocide..." Supposing they are all true, they may show one example of Turkish brutality during a time of war on their Armenian victims. If you are fair minded person, then you must ask yourself this questions: Where are the plates (photos) of Wegner, showing Turkish victims tortured and killed by Armenians? If they are not there, then you must further ask, why not? Don't Turks count as human beings? Are they expendable? If suffering is by Turks, or Muslims, does that somehow not fit the Judeo-Christian thinking or values? My crystal clear question to you is simple: Where are Wegner's photos of Turkish victims?

You say "No room for any pseudo-debate about well established historic facts..." Could not agree more. So here are some facts the Armenians (and their apologists) seem to conveniently ignore:

Look what a prominent scholar, a history professor at UCLA, Stanford J. Shaw, says in his book History Of The Ottoman Empire And modern Turkey , Cambridge University Press (1977), Volume II, page 315, and I quote:

"Armenians again flooded the czarist armies, and the czar returned to St. Petersburg confident that the day finally had come for him to reach Istanbul. Hostilities were opened by Russians, who pushed across the border on November 1, 1914, though the Ottomans stopped them and pushed them back a few days later. A subsequent Russian counter offensive in January caused the Ottoman army to scatter and the way was prepared for a new Russian push into eastern Anatolia , to be accompanied by an open Armenian revolt against the sultan...

Ergun Kirlikovali

Ergun Kirlikovali

Armenian leaders in Russia now declared their open support of the enemy and there seemed no other alternative. It would be impossible to determine which of the Armenians would remain loyal and which would follow the appeals of their leaders. As soon as the spring came, then, in mid-May 1915 orders were issued to evacuate the entire Armenian population from the provinces of Van, Bitlis, and Erzurum, to get them away from all areas where they might undermine the Ottoman campaigns against Russia or against the British in Egypt, with arrangements made to settle them in towns and camps in the Mosul area of Northern Iraq. In addition, Armenians residing in the countryside (but not in the cities) of the Cilician districts as well as those of north Syria were to be sent to central Syria for the same reason. Specific instructions were issued for the army to protect the Armenians against nomadic attacks and to provide them with sufficient food and other supplies to meet their needs during the march and after they were settled. Warnings were sent to the Ottoman military commanders to make certain that neither the Kurds nor any other Muslims used the situation to gain vengeance for the long years of Armenian terrorism. The Armenians were to be protected and cared for until they returned to their homes after the war."

And if you think this prominent history professor is alone in his research findings and/or conclusions, think again. Because 68 other colleagues of Professor Shaw's , historians, scholars, and other experts on this issue, representing top American universities and colleges in this field, have signed a statement addressed to congress and published it in New York Times and Washington Post on May 19, 1985 (I would be more than happy to e-mail you the complete list of those scholars... World renown scholars like Bernard Lewis of Princeton, Justin McCarthy of Univ. of Louisville, etc.) Here is the the declaration:

"To the members of the U.S. House of Representatives : The undersigned American academicians who specialize in Turkish, Ottoman and Middle Eastern Studies are concerned that the current language embodied in House Joint Resolution 192 is misleading and/or inaccurate in several respects. ..
Specifically, while fully supporting the concept of a "National Day of Remembrance of Man's Inhumanity to Man," we respectfully take exception to that portion of the text which singles out for special recognition: ". . . the one and one half million people of Armenian ancestry who were victims of genocide perpetrated in Turkey between 1915 and 1923 . . .."
Our reservations focus on the use of the words "Turkey' and "genocide" and may be summarized as follows:
>From the fourteenth century until 1922, the area currently known as Turkey, or more correctly, the Republic of Turkey, was part of the territory encompassing the multinational, multi-religious state known as the Ottoman Empire. It is wrong to equate the Ottoman Empire with the Republic of Turkey in the same way that it is wrong to equate the Hapsburg Empire with the Republic of Austria. The Ottoman Empire, which was brought to an end in 1922, by the successful conclusion of the Turkish Revolution which established the present day Republic of Turkey in 1923, incorporated lands and people which today account for more than twenty-five distinct countries in Southeastern Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East, only one of which is the Republic of Turkey. The Republic of Turkey bears no responsibility for any events which occurred in Ottoman times, yet by naming 'Turkey' in the Resolution, its authors have implicitly labeled it as guilty of "genocide" it charges transpired between 1915 and 1923;
As for the charge of "genocide," no signatory of this statement wishes to minimize the scope of Armenian suffering. We are likewise cognizant that it cannot be viewed as separate from the suffering experienced by the Muslim inhabitants of the region. The weight of evidence so far uncovered points in the direct of serious inter communal warfare (perpetrated by Muslim and Christian irregular forces), complicated by disease, famine, suffering and massacres in Anatolia and adjoining areas during the First World War. Indeed, throughout the years in question, the region was the scene of more or less continuous warfare, not unlike the tragedy which has gone on in Lebanon for the past decade. The resulting death toll among both Muslim and Christian communities of the region was immense. But much more remains to be discovered before historians will be able to sort out precisely responsibility between warring and innocent, and to identify the causes for the events which resulted in the death or removal of large numbers of the eastern Anatolian population, Christian and Muslim alike.
Statesmen and politicians make history, and scholars write it. For this process to work scholars must be given access to the written records of the statesmen and politicians of the past. To date, the relevant archives in the Soviet Union, Syria, Bulgaria and Turkey all remain, for the most part, closed to dispassionate historians. Until they become available, the history of the Ottoman Empire in the period encompassed by H.J. Res. 192 (1915-1923) cannot be adequately known. We believe that the proper position for the United States Congress to take on this and related issues is to encourage full and open access to all historical archives and not to make charges on historical events before they are fully understood. Such charges as those contained H.J. Res. 192 would inevitably reflect unjustly upon the people of Turkey and perhaps set back irreparably progress historians are just now beginning to achieve in understanding these tragic events....

As the above comments illustrate, the history of the Ottoman-Armenians is much debated among scholars, many of whom do not agree with the historical assumptions embodied in the wording of H.J. Res. 192. By passing the resolution Congress will be attempting to determine by legislation which side of the historical question is correct. Such a resolution, based on historically questionable assumptions, can only damage the cause of honest historical inquiry, and damage the credibility of the American legislative process."

As you can see, prominent historians, scholars, and researchers reject your characterization of "genocide" when referring to the Turkish-Armenian conflict during WWI.


I also object to the numbers. Since exact numbers of casualties is simply impossible to get, given the manual nature of documentation, copying, or recording and the wartime conditions, best estimates based on review and cross comparison of documents, are all we can rely on. The Armenian casualties range from 300,000 (Gurun) to 600,000 (McCarthy), while Muslim losses, mostly Turkish, are about 3 million. No matter whose numbers and estimates one uses, though, this horribly tragic ratio of 4 Turkish losses to every Armenian loss seems to be consistent and that's where our frustration and anger focus: how come no one mentions Turkish dead? Another source of objection to the alleged 1.5 million Armenian loss, is the fact that the entire Armenian population was about 1.3 million at the time (estimates ranging from 1 million to 1.5 million; Armenian estimates, most unreliable, always double triple these numbers). How can anyone kill more than there is? Also, if you look at Armenian loss numbers, they seem to increase by years: up to 600,000 in 1920s, a million in 1960s and 1.5 million in 1980s. Even Encyclopedia of Britannica gives the Armenian dead as 600,000 in 1918 but 1.5 million in 1968. Do Armenian dead multiply?

Even one dead is too many, I agree. But if one wishes to grieve one side's losses and completely ignore the other side's losses, worse yet, if one piggybacks on this racist behavior an unfair claim of genocide leveled against one of the warring factions, then the whole thing is out of order. Is it not fair, is it not the American way, to consider both sides of a claim before rushing to judgment?

Maybe this, from the leader of the Armenian delegation to Paris Peace talks, Boghos Nubar, will trigger "some fairness" in your extremely rigid approach to this whole issue. Look at what Boghos Nubar says in a letter to the Times of London, published on January 30, 1919. He literally begs the allies at Paris conference at the end of World War I, urging the allies to reward the Armenians for their service:

".The Armenians have been, since the beginning of the war, de facto belligerents - since they fought alongside the Allies on all fronts - in Palestine and Syria, where the Armenian volunteers, recruited by the Armenian National Delegation at the request of the French government, made up more than half of the French contingent. In the Caucasus, where, without mentioning the 150,000 Armenians in the Imperial Russian Army, more than 40,000 of their volunteers offered resistance to the Turkish Armies."

What genocide are you talking about? This is war. Plain, simple, and ugly. As all wars are.

You might think "...But what about the documents, photos, monuments, witnesses, etc. on the Armenian Genocide. What about them? "

Turks have documents, photos, maps, books, oral history tapes, monuments, and whatever else is used in documenting history, too, and you can find them in Turkey, in government archives, university libraries, museums, and other such depositories. If the Turkish side didn't present them to the world public opinion with great fanfare and drama, like the Armenians did over the last 85+ years, that is because Turks made a conscious decisions not to dwell on the negatives of the past wars during a time of nation building. Turks chose to forgive and forget.

I have a 10 year old son, for example, who has never yet heard from me the word Armenian. I don't want my son to be a fanatic and a radical, like some Armenian terrorist. Los Angeles Times newspaper is awash with news of Armenian kids, as young as 5, 6, 7 years old, reciting hateful poems for candy money from their fathers, where they say awful things like "I will grow up and butcher all the Turks." You don't have to take my word for this, just look at the press reports. This is why we, the Turkish Americans, were subjected to a violent campaign of international terrorism for 30 years since 1970s, mainly by brain-washed young Armenian terrorists, under the guidance and enthusiastic support of older Armenians. More than 70 Turkish diplomats, their families, and innocent bystanders were killed, hundreds were wounded by Armenian terrorists. I have a complete list of Armenian terrorist acts, which I would be more than happy to e-mail you. There, you will see assassinations, bombings, bomb threats, intimidations, harassment, and many other forms of terrorism, right here in California, some even in Disneyland. Did you know, for example, 3 Turkish diplomats were murdered in cold blood by Armenian fanatics just here in California in the last 30 years? These hate crimes largely went under reported, quickly white washed with Armenian stories when they happened, and then ignored, and finally, forgotten. ( If we excuse the Armenians for their terroristic acts, would not that pave the way to excuse all similar acts, like the Palestinian acts of terrorsim? Or are we going to excuse one, but not he other, arguing my terrorist is better than your terrorist? )

The only difference between the documents the Turkish government and academic sources have in Turkey and what the Armenians show you as documents is that the Turkish documents are genuine, but the Armenian documents are mostly fake.

For example, Armenians will show you Talat Pasa telegrams, which they claim to be "smoking gun" evidence, and which were proven to be absolute fakeries, by Prof. Heath Lowry, a historian at Princeton University (I would be more than happy to e-mail you a larger summary of his book). Basically, Armenian fabricator forgot the simple fact that Turks used lunar Islamic calendar and the dates entered simply did not exist (like saying 32nd day of the month)!

Another infamous quote, purported to be made by Hitler, also used by you and millions of other gullible supporters of Armenian cause was exposed to be a fakery, and a poor fakery at that, by the same scholar. It was shown to be fabricated by an Armenian journalist and slipped into a pile of Nuremberg documents, where it stuck out a like sore thumb, with no dates, signatures, sequence numbers, etc., totally out of place with the rest of the German precision in documentation. As you correctly pointed out "...With their Teutonic orderliness, Germans have kept to this day thousands of reports in their wartime archives..." Armenian fabrication simply didn't fit into the German body of documents. This is the reason why the US judges rejected it as evidence.

Another fakery: Photo of a skull, purported to belong to Armenian victims of so-called genocide. This was a painting by a Russian artist, 10 years prior to 1915, and still hanbging today in a Moscow museum... An Armenian agent must have thought "Who's going to know? Just slip it in!".

Armenians must also use letters and reports by the American ambassador Morgenthau, but not the letters by a succeeding American ambassador Bristol, who refuted the writings of Morgenthau. Did you know Morgenthau's reports were forwarded to Washington DC from Istanbul, but actually were generated mostly by Armenian Revolutionary Federation and/or anti-Muslim missionaries, and further embellished by Armenian assistants of the ambassador? Did you know Morgetnhau's writings were little more than wartime propaganda, designed to drum up support for American entry into the WWI? Did you know that Morgenthau's exaggerated reports of absolute horror and mass killings were not admitted into evidence by the British court in Malta after the war? I ask you, if they were so correct. so genuine, so reliable, so irrefutable, then how come they were simply rejected by the British prosecutors? That is because even an ally knows where hype, hatred, and propaganda stops, and where truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth enters.

Werfel's heart wrenching story, his book called 40 Days At Musa Dagh about courageous Armenian uprising and tragic end. fake! Werfel heard these stories from an Armenian bishop friend in Vienna and never questioned the Bishop's account. Years later, when he found out "the Truth" — that only 500 Armenians were captured after 40 days of siege, and the 50,000 Armenians escaped via another route at the back of the mountain, to Mediterranean and then transported by British and French warships to Alexandria, Egypt, under British rule then. So all the "dead Armenians" somehow "miraculously "surfaced in Egypt! Surprised, not me. If you knew the Armenian history of subterfuge, fakery, fabrication, misrepresentation, and outright lies, like we Turkish-Americans and Turks do, you would not be surprised at all. I can list dozens, even hundreds of fake Armenian documents. Do you now understand why Armenian allegations of genocide was never accepted as the truth by the world international body?



Orel, Sinasi & Yuca, Sureyya, The Talat Pasha Telegrams - Historical Fact or Armenian Fiction
K. Rustem & Brother, Lefkosa (Nicosia), Northern Cyprus (1986). "...To date, there is no evidence that the Ottoman State had a policy of extermination of the Armenians. Ottoman statesmen who were imprisoned in Malta after WWI for alleged crimes against Armenians were all released due to lack of evidence. Faked telegrams attributed to the Young Turk government have since been thoroughly exposed as forgeries . Even the British did not use these in their persecution of Ottoman statesmen..."

Prof. Turkkaya Ataov, An Armenian Falsification, Sevinc Matbaasi, Ankara (1985); page 7.
". I proved, for example, beyond any doubt, that a picture presumably a photograph of a heap of skulls of "massacred Armenians" in 1915 was actually an oil painting by a Russian artist (The Apotheosis of War by Vassili Vereshcahgin) who died in 1904."

Prof. Turkkaya Ataov, Hitler and The "Armenian Question", Sistem Ofset, Ankara (1984)
".This is an attempt to link the planned extermination of European Jewry in the course of the Second World War to the events connected with Armenians. First of all, there is no historical basis for attributing such a statement to Hitler. I have traced in a booklet that the Nuremberg Tribunal accepted two versions of this Hitler talk, initially numbered as USA-29 and USA-30, refusing to approve a third one. None of these texts contains such a statement.

Prof. Heath W. Lowry, The U.S. Congress and Adolf Hitler on the Armenians, Political Communication and Persuasion, Volume 3/2 (1985); pages 111-139; Likewise, Dr. Lowry traces, in a scholarly article, the manner in which this purported quote has entered the lexicon of U.S. Congressmen, and the manner in which it continues to be used by Armenian-Americans in their efforts to establish a linkage between their own history and the tragic fate of European Jewry.

Stanford J. Shaw, Turkey and Holocaust: Turkey's Role in Rescuing Turkish and European Jewry From Nazi Persecution, New York University Press, New York (1993): ".Reliable methodology and historiography contradicts such a pursuit. It is tremendous injustice to the Jews and the Turks alike. The Jews have gone through a genocide another example of which is very difficult to find. Moreover, apart from the extraordinarily good relations between the Jews and the Turks since the Middle Ages, Turkey's role in helping European Jews during the Holocaust has been largely ignored. As Professor Shaw notes, the world does not realize the extent to which Turkey, and the Ottoman Empire which preceded it, over the centuries served as major places of refuge for people suffering from persecution, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Turkey was a haven, not only for those who escaped the Inquisition, but also hundreds of well-known intellectuals during 1930s and thousands of other less well known persons were rescued."

George Abel Schreiner, An American war correspondent , The Craft Sinister (1920) and Prof. Heath W. Lowry, Professor of History, Princeton University, The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau's Story, The Isis Press, Istanbul (1990). The anti-Turkish claims advanced in Ambassador Morgenthau's book have been shown to be exaggerations of wartime propaganda by both the American WWI war correspondent George Abel Schreiner and by Professor Heath W. Lowry of Princeton University . Ambassador Morgenthau's book was also a key source for three influential wartime anti-Turkish books: the publications by Lord Bryce, the German Pastor Dr. Johannes Lepsius and young Arnold J. Toynbee. The so-called Blue Book was an important British wartime propaganda publication.

Albert Amateau, Notarized Statement, "Franz Werfel's Confessions & Armenian Betrayal", Federation of Turkish American Societies, Inc., New York (1992); page 9: ".My friend Franz Werfel, of Vienna, Austria, a writer, wrote a book entitled The 40 Days Of Mussa Dagh, a history of the massacre of the Armenians by the Ottomans. The story was told him by his friend, the Armenian bishop of Vienna and Werfel never doubted the Bishop's account. He did not investigate what he wrote. Years later, when the true facts about Mussa Dagh were established by the research of neutral investigators - which was never denied by Armenians - Werfel discovered that he had been duped by his friend, the Bishop, with a concocted story. Werfel confessed to me his shame and remorse for having written that story, in which he had blamed the Ottomans as the aggressors and terrorists. Fifty thousand Armenians, residents of villages in and around Erzerum in Turkey, surreptitiously ascended a mountain called Mussa Dagh (dagh is Turkish for mountain) with arms, ammunition, victuals and water, sufficient to withstand a siege of many days. Before ascending that mountain, they had captured hundreds of Muslim Turks and Jews, their fellow citizens and neighbors, with whom they were supposedly on good terms. They murdered them all in cold blood, for no other reason than they were Muslims and Jews. Thereafter, every night armed Armenian bands came down from that mountain and attacked the rear of Ottoman and German armies fighting the Russian invaders. This was at the very beginning of the First World War, and part of the secret plans made by the Russians and assigned to the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. The Turks were mystified. The Armenian attackers would disappear. Try as they did, at first the Ottomans were unable to trace the disappearing Armenians, but finally they discovered that Mussa Dagh was the hiding place. The Ottomans found the mountain fortress unassailable. They laid siege and waited 40 days before the Armenian rear guard conceded defeat and laid down their arms. But the Ottoman forces found the mountain empty. The large army had disappeared down the other side of the mountain where they had found an exit to the Mediterranean. French and British men-of-war had been signaled and they picked up the main army, transporting the soldiers to Alexandria, Egypt, then under the control of the British. Less than 500, the rear guard who gave themselves up, were captured by the Ottomans.
Yet, in telling the story to Werfel to write, the Bishop had claimed 50,000 victims captured and put to death - an invented story. , just as the story of 1.5 million massacred in 1915. If 1.5 million Armenians lost their lives during that war, they died as soldiers, fighting a war of their own choosing against the Ottoman Empire which had treated them decently and benignly. They were the duped victims of the Russians, of the Allies, and of their own Armenian leaders."

We do have survivors of Armenian atrocities, too, and examples of oral history can be found at Turkish websites today. They may not be as many as Armenians' because Armenians and Greeks have done a better job of killing their victims. I am saying this with a heavy heart, because you are looking at a product of Turkish Genocide in the Balkans, which everyone is curiously silent about. Just look at my last name: KIRLIKOVALI. The whole Balkan tragedy is packed there. It means "a person from KIRLIK-OVA" in Turkish. KIRLIK-OVA is the name of a little village near today's Thessaloniki in Greece (Selanik, under Turkish rule). This village was populated entirely by ethnic Turks, like thousands of other villages all across the Balkans at the time. Yet, all I know about my grandparents, whom I have never met, thanks to Greek butchery and wholesale massacres, is this: In the year 1912, trains full of "Turkish babies" with few babysitters were making, what turned out to be their last scheduled runs to Istanbul, capital of the Ottoman Empire at the time. Among these tiny passengers was my father... A little hand-written note on a piece of paper was pinned on his tiny shirt: "Akif's son Ratip. Born 1911. KIRLIK-OVA " That's it. This is all I know about my father's side... Where are his moms and dad? His brothers and sisters? His uncles and aunts and cousing? Where are other moms and dads. friends and neighbors? What happened to them? How can the entire population of a village disappear into thin air like that, without leaving a trace? They all presumably had stayed behind to defend their home against the Greek invaders. Turkish babies and young children were hastily shipped away to relative safety of Istanbul, on what I now call "trains of compassion"... If what we witnessed in Bosnia and Kosova in 1990s are any indication, then I think I, we know what happened to those Turks who disappeared without a trace 90 years ago: all were slaughtered mercilessly and buried in unmarked, mass graves. Of course there were no satellites back then to take pictures of freshly dug mass graves. Where and how, we probably will never know. But we sure do know who and why. The truth is simple: Turks were eliminated in an ethnic cleansing campaign ruthlessly waged by the Greek militia. So, when I see those Armenians survivors telling their stories, I say to myself, 'You are lucky, because you lived to tell about it. My grandparents were not as lucky as you. Greeks saw to it that they could not be here to tell their side of the story. Who knows what kind of terrible death abruptly ended their young lives. Who knows?. So, please spare me. Don't lecture me about genocide. I am a product of genocide. Turkish Genocide in the Balkans. That is.

My father was cared for by the Turkish State. He was taken to "Dar-Ul Eytam" (which is an Ottoman Turkish name; or "Yetimler Evi" in modern Turkish; or "Orphans' Home" in English) in Bebek, Istanbul, when he was only a 1-year old baby... He was raised there. He attended public schools in Istanbul and Bursa and then Istanbul University, Forestry Department, which, ironically, was itself created and staffed by Jewish professors fleeing persecution by Greeks in Selanik (Thessaloniki) and by the Nazis in Germany. My father graduated in 1939 as a Forest Engineer and served Turkey with distinction for 34 years before passing away in 1973. He married my mother in 1940 in Bursa, who was the daughter of a Turkish refugee from Uskup (Skopje), Macedonia. Together they had 8 children. One of those children, born in 1952, is talking to you now... My mother's story is also equally tragic and also connected to the forgotten "Turkish Genocide in The Balkans during 1911-1914" but it involves the co-religionists of the Greeks, the Serbians, who were equally brutal when it came to ethnic cleansing of Turks and other Muslims."

One look at my family, and you get a quick history and geography lesson on man's inhumanity to man: my father, the only survivor of a genocide perpetrated by Greek militias in Western Thrace. My mother, the only daughter of a refugee from Macedonian atrocities in Skopje, Macedonia, who escaped to Turkey with only clothes on her back and was resettled in Bursa. My oldest brother Cenk's wife, Guler, an Izmir-born daughter of a refugee from the Island of Crete, escaping ethnic cleansing campaign persistently waged by Greeks there. My second oldest borther, Metin's wife, Elvira, a Belgium-born daughter of a Turkish immigrant from Crimea (Southern Ukranie), expelled by Soviets in 1940s. One of my neighbors was called "Karabagli", son of a refugee from Caucasia, fleeing Russian bayonets and Armenian swords. My other neighbors' last name was "Bagdatli", meaning people from Bagdat, fleeing Arab machetes under the direction of, so called, 'The Lawrence of Arabia' (Remember?). Other neighbors with chillingly sad last names that speak volumes on man's inhumanity to man. All my life, I have known or heard of people with last names like Kazanli, Filibeli, Kircali, Kerkuklu, Midillili, Kibrisli, Cecen, Ozbek, Azeri, Rodoslu, Rodoplu, Arnavut, Iskodrali, Vardar, Pristineli, Sokollu, Bukresli, Altay, Uygur, Kirgiz, Turkmen, Tatar, Hazer, Tebrizli, . On and on and on.. We, Turks, are the survivors of many genocidal campaigns waged against us, by the Russians, Armenians, Greeks, the British, the French, the Bulgarians, the Serbians, and others. Our last names tell our sad stories. We are all products of an ignored genocide. We don't need lessons from others on genocide. Our story is untold by Turks, ignored by the West, but they are all true."

Prof. Turkkaya Ataov, The 'Armenian Question', Stratejik Arastirmalar Merkezi (SAM), (The Center For Strategic Research), ,Ankara, (1999), page 6: ".The Armenians, who had no majority in Eastern Anatolia, cooperated during the First World War, with the aggressive and expanding Russians, without whose active cooperation, they though, they had no chance of a homeland. The territory, whether in Eastern Anatolia or most of the Caucasus, which the Armenians claimed as their own, was largely inhabited by non-Armenians. The demographic reality that disproved Armenian aspirations could be changed by foreign support and ethnic cleansing..."

Truth will shine!

 Justin McCarthy, Death and Exile, The Darwin, Princeton Press (1995), "..Much of the history of Anatolia, the Caucasus, the Balkans and southern Russia cannot be understood without a proper assessment of the Muslim dead and Muslim refugees."

Lamsa, George M., a missionary well known for his research on Christianity, The Secret of the Near East, The Ideal Press, Philadelphia (1923), page 133, clarified the difference between reality and propaganda as follows:

".In some towns containing ten Armenian houses and thirty Turkish houses, it was reported that 40,000 people were killed, about 10,000 women were taken to the harem, and thousands of children left destitute; and the city university destroyed, and the bishop killed. It is a well-known fact that even in the last war the native Christians, despite the Turkish cautions, armed themselves and fought on the side of the Allies. In these conflicts, they were not idle, but they were well supplied with artillery, machine guns and inflicted heavy losses on their enemies."

As you can see, Armenian fabrications were exposed, but never found their ways to newspaper columns. Only anti-Turkish exaggerations, biased stories found quick spots in newspapers and journals across the US. The more anti-Muslim and anti-Turkish the missionary reports were, the more popular the stories got. None of their reports mentioned the suffering endured by Turks and other Muslims, as if they did not exit. Half the story was missing in their reports. Would you rely on a report or testimony where half the story is missing?

Look what E. Alexander Powell, An American, says in his book, The Struggle for Power in Moslem Asia, The Century Co., New York & London (1923), pages 32-33,

".Now I can readily understand and make allowance for the public's errors and misconceptions, for it has had, after all, no means of knowing that it has been systematically deceived, but I can find no excuse for those newspapers which, clinging to a policy of vilifying the Turk, failed to rectify the anti-Turkish charges printed in their columns even when it had been proved to the satisfaction of most fair-minded persons that they were unjustified. A case in point was the burning of Smyrna in September, 1922. There was scarcely a newspaper of importance in the United States that did not editorially lay that outrage at the door of the Turks, without waiting to hear the Turkish version, yet, after it had been attested by American, English, and French eye-witnesses, and by a French commission of inquiry, that the city had been deliberately fired by the Greeks and Armenians in order to prevent it falling into Turkish hands, how many newspapers had the courage to admit that they had done the Turks a grave injustice?."

Prof. Turkkaya Ataov, in An Armenian Source (1895) On The Armenian Question, Sistem Ofset, Ankara (1986) says this of the reporting:

".The Armenian Troubles and Where The Responsibility Lies is the title of a booklet by a correspondent of a New York newspaper, who apparently reproduced in 1895 in pamphlet form, the five letters he had written in and sent from Istanbul. Believing that the whole atmosphere on the Sassoon events of 1894 has been 'polluted with falsehood and exaggerations', he states that the disturbances were ' brought about by the Armenian revolutionary committees'... The author quotes the AP correspondent who says that the Armenian conspirators murdered the Rev. Edward Riggs and two other American missionaries and fastened the blame on the Turks."

".As to the story that Armenian women, who, rather than 'suffer dishonor at the hands of (their) Turkish persecutors', threw themselves in to an abyss until the ravine was filled with corpses, the American correspondent says that 'the horrible narrative is a reproduction, with additions and embellishments to suit the occasion, of an old tale in poetry by Mrs. Hemans years ago, under the title of 'The Suliote Mother'. He writes : 'Provocation and intimidation seem to be the plan of the Armenian revolutionists'."

The British, upon occupying Istanbul , quickly set out to investigate the horrible Armenian claims. The British whisked the top government officials to exile in Malta in 1918, as the first order of the day, where they awaited their court proceedings. Though the British had full access to the Ottoman documents and plenty of time, they produced no documents that could be used at a court of law to convict Ottoman officials. After 2 years at Malta, all the Ottoman top government officials were let go.

Dr. Tuncer Kuzay, a Turkish-American intellectual, wrote in a press release dated April 12, 1999:

". The Armenians have been feverishly trying to attach a charge of genocide on the Turks for the past 84 years or so. In the relentless pursuit of it, they have declared April 24 as the date of commemoration of this 'alleged genocide' . The British were the closest party to these events from 1915 to 1922 because they were the principal occupying power of the Ottoman Empire and its capital, Istanbul, and the Ottoman archives etc. As such, the British led an international war crimes tribunal on the island of Malta against 144 high Ottoman officials who were charged with war crimes against the Armenians. Subsequently 56 out of the 144 alleged criminals were deported to the Island of Malta to stand a trial. After a wide scale frantic search of all the archival material in the British and the US possession they concluded: ' ...Sir H. Rumbold, His Majesty's High Commissioner at Istanbul as the head of the occupying powers, wrote in forwarding to London the 'evidence' against the deportees that 'very few were available, that Armenian Patriarchate at Istanbul had been the principal channel through which information had been obtained, and that none of allied, associated and neutral Governments had been asked to supply evidence...'.

He admitted that 'under these circumstances the Prosecution will find itself under grave disadvantage', but he added, 'he hoped that the American Government could supply a large amount of documentary information'. (Foreign Office document 371/6500/E. 3557). In failing to find any legally acceptable evidence against the deportees in the hands of the occupying powers, Lord Curzon, the British foreign secretary at the time, informed Sir A. Geddes, the British Ambassador at Washington, that there was a 'considerable difficulty' in establishing proof of guilty against the Turkish detainees at Malta and requested him 'to ascertain if United States Government are in possession of any evidence that could be of value for purpose of prosecution'. (Foreign Office document 371/6502/E. 5845).

On July 13 1921, the British Embassy in Washington returned the following reply: (Foreign Office document 371/6504/E.8519. R.C. Craige , British Embassy in Washington to Lord Curzon, No. 722, of July 13, 1921.)

'I regret to inform Your Lordship that there was nothing therein which could be used as evidence against the Turks who are being detained for trial at Malta. Having regard to this stipulation and the fact that the reports in the possession of the Department of State do not appear in any case to contain evidence against these Turks which would be useful even for the purpose of corroborating information already in possession of His Majesty's Government, I fear that nothing is to be hoped from addressing any further inquiries to the United States Government in this matter'.

Subsequently all the Ottoman detainees were dismissed of charges and exchanged for the British prisoners in Turkey. And there were no war crimes charges, let alone a charge of a "genocide" of the Armenians. In 1999,, the Armenians appealed to the British Government to recognize the alleged Armenian genocide to which the British Government replied.

On April 14, 1999 the PA News from London reported:

"A bid to get the British Government to recognize as genocide the deportation and massacre and slaughter of thousands of Armenians by the Ottoman government of Turkey in 1915, was rejected by ministers in the Lords tonight".

Foreign Office spokesman, Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale, said

"The British Government had condemned the massacres at the time. But 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. The events of 1915-16 remain a painful issue in relation to two states with which we enjoy excellent relations".



There is one more episode to this saga. The British Government's position on the "Armenian genocide" allegations has been expressed once again in a written response by Baroness Scotland of Asthal to a question on February 7, 2001 at the House of Lords as follows :

"Lord Biffen asked Her Majesty's Government: Whether they will list the factors which have dissuaded them from acknowledging as genocide the Armenian massacre in 1915. " Baroness Scotland of Asthal wrote back: "The Government, in line with previous British Governments, have judged the evidence not to be sufficiently unequivocal to persuade us that these events should be categorised as genocide as defined by the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide, a convention which was drafted in response to the Holocaust and is not retrospective in application. The interpretation of events in Eastern Anatolia in 1915-16 is still the subject of genuine debate amongst historians."

As you can clearly see, even the British, whose recanted and obsolete wartime propaganda during WWI (i.e. the so called "Blue Book") upon which the the Armenians have been basing their baseless allegations, flatly refuse to support Armenian allegations. How many refutations does it take to make the case that "genocide" allegations can not be supported by hard, historical, reliable, court-acceptable evidence. How come Morgenthau's reports, so damning to the Turks, were rejected by the British prosecutors in Malta? How come the alleged Hitler's quote was rejected by American prosecutors in Nuremberg? How come all the missionary reports, Armenian church reports were not enough the convict Turks for 86 years? Because, my friend, they were fake, fake, fake, and fake again.

The plain truth is Armenians used propaganda, agitation, armed violence, rebellion, betrayal, exaggerations, fabrications, and lies, between 1890 and 1915, and international terrorism between 1922 and 2001, but none helped them achieve what they really wanted: an expanded "Greater Armenia" for Armenians, mostly carved out of Turkish lands. Turks won the war then. Armenians simply can not accept this simple truth and put it behind them. As a result, they attacked Azerbaijan in 1989, and captured by force 20% of sovereign Azerbaijani soil. More than 1.5 million Azerbaijani non-combatants are forced out of their homes at gunpoint by Armenian aggressors. Those forgotten refugees are now spending their 9th freezing winter in leaky tents with little food or medicine, with no end in sight to Armenian demands and atrocities. US humanitarian help is stopped by the manipulation of the US Congress by the Armenian lobby. Here we are, discussing Armenian allegations after 86 years, while 1.5 million people are suffering for real in Caucasia.

You say " (Wegner's) photographs are now permanent part of Holocaust Memorial Museum where Adolf Hitler's words are emblezoned permanently on a wall, to say "Who remembers the Armenians?" The first ignores much larger Turkish suffering and the second is a proven fakery... All you are doing is deliberately misrepresenting the truth to the unsuspecting public and you are insulting the silent memory of the 6+ million Jews who were systematically killed by the Nazi Germany. You are demeaning the uniques experience that is Holocaust. Let me ask you this: Did Jews establish Jewish armies, behind German lines, in order to backsatb and betray Germany, ethnically cleanse parts of Germany from Germans, in order to establish a Jewish state on German soil? Of course not! But Armenians did all that and more in the Ottoman Empire. So, how can the "undisputable" Holocaust be compared to "alleged" Genocide?

Last but not least, I will leave you with this. Dadrian's book you mention simply fails to mention the much larger Turkish suffering, and therefore, it can only be viewed as a partsian documentation of selective evidence. But look at what another Armenian historian, Prof. Hovannissian of UCLA, says about his own people in his book The Republic of Armenia, Vol. 1, page 294, The First Year 1918-1919 on Armenian's aggression (page 109), when on December 14, 1918, by a surprise and unprovoked attack on its neighbor Georgia, Armenia attempted a land grab attempt.

"...On December 17, 1918...when the 'Armenian invasion' was well under way. Premier Noizhordonia of Georgia spoke to his people: 'There has taken place that which should not have taken place. Regretfully, Armenia had incited rebellion and then had brought up her regular army. The present Armenian government, in instigating this shameful conflict, has precipitated that which has never before occurred---war between Georgia and Armenia: Who had ever heard of war over a few incidents in a village or two? The real explanation could be found in the character of Kachaznuni's government, which, like the wolf, eats the calf because such is its nature. That government could not live in peace and was obsessed with battling one or another of its neighbors, for like the wolf, it had to devour everything. Should not the Armenians have realized that, in view of their hostile relations with the Muslims, they must at least cling to the friendship of (Christian) Georgia? But instead they had now burned this bridge as well...' "

Armenian aggression is well documented, even by Armenian historians. Armenia always demanded land from neighbors like Turkey, Georgia, Azerbaijan, and , yes, even Russia. What we are seeing in Azerbaijan today is a mere continuation of Armenian policy of armed aggression that started in 1890 and never really stopped, thanks to continuous flow of help from American and European taxpayers who were duped into believing that they were helping "poor starving Armenians".

And here is an American source. Admiral Mark Lambert Bristol served as the Commander of the U.S. Naval Detachment in Turkish waters and as the U.S. High Commissioner to Turkey during the years 1919-1927. His reports are housed in the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress. The following is an excerpt from Bristol's letter dated March 28, 1921 to Dr. James L. Barton, the Secretary of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions:

"I see that reports are being freely circulated in the United States that the Turks massacred thousands of Armenians in the Caucasus. Such reports are repeated so many times it makes my blood boil. The Near East Relief have the reports from Yarrow and our own American people which show that such Armenian reports are absolutely false. The circulation of such false reports in the United States, without refutation, is an outrage and is certainly doing the Armenians more harm than good. I feel that we should discourage the Armenians in this kind of work, not only because it is wrong, but because they are injuring themselves. In addition to the reports from our own American Relief workers that were in Kars and Alexandrople, and reports from such men as Yarrow, I have reports from my own Intelligence Officer and know that the Armenian reports are not true. Is there not something that you and the Near East Relief Committee can do to stop the circulation of such false reports?"

There are also very revealing reports by Captain Emory Niles and Mr.Arthur Sutherland. They were Americans ordered by the United States Government in 1919, to investigate the situation in eastern Anatolia following the allegations of Morgenthau. Their reporting was to be used as the basis for granting relief aid to the Armenians. Instead, they chronicled the atrocities perpetrated by Armenians on Turkish villages.

Please also note that the allies (Britain, France, Italy, Russia, then US) did not recognize Armenia in 1918-1919 and did not allow it a place at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. The allies also did not "buy" into Armenian claims of systematic wholesale Turkish massacres, because they did not give Armenians the lands or the monies the Armenians were seeking in reparations. If the allies did not believe Armenian characterizations of events of WWI in 1918-1919, why should they believe now? The short answer is they don't. That is why the Armenian lobby is pushing and pushing... They use media, politicans, chuch, museums, public forums, and more... But they simply can not dupe all the people all the time... Because it was a tragic civil war within a war with casualties on all sides, not genocide...

Truth will shine!




  Reflections by a Turkish Citizen


Dear Mr. Horowitz,

I read your letter to Ergun Kirlikovali dated August 12 with surprise and desbelief and Ergun's response to you with much relief. I trust you will now have a chance to evaluate your thinking on the true nature of the Armenian issue. I hope Ergun's letter will provide you the motivation to do more research on the subject rather than just believing what some Armenians tell you and disseminate without knowing the real truth.

I would like to take advantage of your letter and tell you about the American involvement in the Armenian uprisings in Anatolia through the Missionary schools which numbered well over 450 during the years of conflict. Unfortunately, the American involvement has not been written about much. As a graduate of one of these missionary schools, I regret to tell you that the Armenians were first used by the Americans, followed by the Russians, the French and the British, all for the break up of the Ottoman empire, as eloquently told in Ergun's letter. I was told that the very first armed Armenian rebels were established in Merzýfon, thanks to the American school there. The sad story of the American involvement is told in a new book by Prof. Cagri Erhan, Turk-Amerikan Iliskilerinin Tarihsel Kokenleri (The Historical Roots of Turkish-American Relations). The book is in Turkish, but I hope one of your Turkish colleages can read it for you. The book is 400 pages and covers the period from 1776 to 1914.

As described in the easily read book, American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, established in 1810, decides to open missionary schools in the Ottoman Empire. The number of missionaries reaches 209 in 1913, the year when 163 protestant churches and 450 schools were operating. The same year the number of Ottoman citizens at these schools were 25,000. The majority of the students were from the minorities and their education were aimed at creating nationalism among them, which they succed at the expense of the Ottoman Government. The Armenian issue was carried to the United States towards the end of the 19th century and formed the basis of the negative image of Turks. This is also the beginning of Armenian diaspora which has never ceased to invent statements such as those attributed to Hitler, which is a lie as described in Ergun's letter. What a shame that it is emblezoned permanently on the wall of the Holocaust memorial Museum, which the Armenians want to put on the entrance of their museum to be opened nearby. I hope you do some reasearch on the American involvement as well.

As Ergun tells you in his letter, Turks made a conscious decision not to dwell on the negatives of the past wars and chose to forgive and forget, as told to the world in Ataturk's beautiful words ''Peace at Home, Peace in the World''. As a result of never ending negative propaganda by some Armenians, they have now started discussing the Armenian atrocities at Turkish high schools. Only yesterday I heard from a 15 year old student that she felt uncomfortable with the description of the atrocities by her history teacher and voiced her opposition the way the events were being presented. Her teacher did not like what she was saying and punished her with a grade. How sad.

I hope you will someday see the truth and work for peace among all peoples of the United States.


Yuksel Oktay, Turkey


Thoughts of a Turkish Professor


We must congratulate Kirliovali for his uniqiue and complete answer to Mr. Horowitz. I understand his reaction so well since I happen to be from a family from Thesaloniki. It is well documented in history that 1)Turks are the few ethnic groups and maybe the only known for their regard for minorities just as their own kinsfolk; 2) minority uprisings are always provoked by major powers or by personalities within minorities who seek personal gains as it was true of Armenia Orthodox priests . Mr. Horowitz's ignorant acceptance of a genocide reflects that character of a provocateur from which many a human has suffered. Maybe it is a genetic disorder to enjoy humans fighting each other but I am sure it is a serious personality disorder.

Prof.Yuruk Iyriboz

  Response by Professor Mahmut Ozan


Dear Ergun,

I started to read once more your masterpiece of literature. Once I started I could not stop. I read very slowly deliberately taking in me all the beautiful nuances of your 'expository writing'. It took me minutes to really ingest it again and again. I hope most of this would end up in the API agenda. It should also be printed as a book for the whole world of Christendom to read and repent. As I said once to Sam I find it hard in my brain to find new accolades to bestow on your writings the richest and the most luxurious adjectives to describe you and your words. Your 10 year old
son should be the happiest kid on the block to have you as his father.

Thanks for an enjoyable afternoon.



  See Also:

Ergun Kirlikovali's essay on Ethocide


"West" Accounts


Armenian Views
Geno. Scholars


Turks in Movies
Turks in TV


This Site