Month: August 2009

  • Turkey, Armenia To Sign Accords On Normalizing Ties

    Turkey, Armenia To Sign Accords On Normalizing Ties

    August 31, 2009

    ISTANBUL (Reuters) — Turkey and Armenia will sign two accords within six weeks on normalizing ties between the two countries after a century of hostility, a Turkish Foreign Ministry source has told reporters.

    The two countries announced a road map in April to restore ties and end almost a century of hostility.

  • Protocols between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Turkey

    Protocols between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Turkey

    Protocols between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Turkey
    August 31, 2009
     
    Press release by the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Foreign of the Republic of Armenia and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey
    August 31, 2009
  • Poor Richard’s Report

    Poor Richard’s Report

    Poor Richard’s Report

    Over 300,001 readers
    My Mission: God has uniquely designed me to seek, write, and speak the truth as I see it. Preservation of one’s wealth while providing needful income is my primary goal in these unsettled times. I have given the ability to evaluate study, and interpret world and national events and their influence on future of the financial markets. This gift allows me to meet the needs of individual and institution clients. I evaluate situations first on a fundamental basis then try to confirm on a technical basis. In the past it has been fairly successful.

    This is a classic letter. Please read it. Cheerio !!!!
    From:
    This sender is DomainKeys verified
    “John Mauldin”
    Add sender to Contacts
    To:
    [email protected]
    This message was sent to [email protected].
    Send to a Friend | Print Article | View as PDF | Permissions/Reprints

    Thoughts from the Frontline Weekly Newsletter
    An Uncomfortable Choice
    by John Mauldin
    August 28, 2009

    In this issue:
    An Uncomfortable Choice
    What Were We Thinking?
    Frugality is the New Normal
    And Then We Face the Real Problem
    The Teenagers Are in Control
    Choose Wisely
    Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, New Orleans, Detroit, and More
    We have arrived at this particular economic moment in time by the choices we have made, which now leave us with choices in our future that will be neither easy, convenient, nor comfortable. Sometimes there are just no good choices, only less-bad ones. In this week’s letter we look at what some of those choices might be, and ponder their possible consequences. Are we headed for a double-dip recession? Read on.
    An Important Announcement
    But first, I want to make a very important announcement. There are not many times in a career when you can say that something new has been created in the financial services industry and that you have been a part of it. But now I can say that and, I must admit, with a little pride in helping to bring a new creation into the world.
    For years, Steve Blumenthal and I have shared a passion for bringing Absolute Return Strategies to all investors, not just the wealthy and institutional investors.
    I want to introduce you to a new mutual fund, one that is different than the typical long-only equity mutual fund. My friends and partners at CMG have created a mutual fund that is comprised of 9 different trading strategies, a “fund of trading strategies,” so to speak; and it’s one that I believe will be strategically suitable for the economic environment that I think we face. And, as a mutual fund, it is open to all investors.
    You can learn more about it by reading a report I have prepared, entitled “How to Deal with Volatility in Extraordinary Markets – Introducing the CMG Absolute Return Strategies Fund.” Simply click here.
    If you are an investment advisor or broker, you especially should read about this new fund and contact CMG directly for more information and reports. Full disclosure: as a consultant to the Advisor to the fund, my investment advisory firm does participate in the fees. And be sure and read all the disclosures and risk factors in the document.
    And now, let’s look at the choices we face.
    An Uncomfortable Choice
    As our family grew, we limited the choices our seven kids could make; but as they grew into teenagers, they were given more leeway. Not all of their choices were good. How many times did Dad say, “What were you thinking?” and get a mute reply or a mumbled “I don’t know.”
    Yet how else do you teach them that bad choices have bad consequences? You can lecture, you can be a role model; but in the end you have to let them make their own choices. And a lot of them make a lot of bad choices. After having raised six, with one more teenage son at home, I have come to the conclusion that you just breathe a sigh of relief if they grow up and have avoided fatal, life-altering choices. I am lucky. So far. Knock on a lot of wood.
    I have watched good kids from good families make bad choices, and kids with no seeming chance make good choices. But one thing I have observed. Very few teenagers make the hard choice without some outside encouragement or help in understanding the known consequences, from some source. They nearly always opt for the choice that involves the most fun and/or the least immediate pain, and then learn later that they now have to make yet another choice as a consequence of the original one. And thus they grow up. So quickly.
    But it’s not just teenagers. I am completely capable of making very bad choices as I approach the end of my sixth decade of human experiences and observations. In fact, I have made some rather distressing choices over time. Even in areas where I think I have some expertise I can make appallingly bad choices. Or maybe particularly in those areas, because I have delusions of actually knowing something. In my experience, it takes an expert with a powerful computer to truly foul things up.
    Of course, sometimes I get it right. Even I learn, with enough pain. And sometimes I just get lucky. (Although, as my less-than-sainted Dad repeatedly intoned, “The harder I work the luckier I get.”)
    Each morning is a new day, but it is a new day impacted by all the choices of the previous days and years. Tiffani and I have literally interviewed in depth well over a hundred millionaires, and talked anecdotally with hundreds over the years. I am struck by how their lives, and those of their families, come down to a few choices. Sometimes good choices and sometimes lucky choices. Often, difficult ones. But very few were the easy choice.
    What Were We Thinking?
    As a culture, the current mix of generations, especially in the US, has made some choices. Choices which, in hindsight, leave the adult in us asking, “What were we thinking?”
    In a way, we were like teenagers. We made the easy choice, not thinking of the consequences. We never absorbed the lessons of the Depression from our grandparents. We quickly forgot the sobering malaise of the ’70s as the bull market of the ’80s and ’90s gave us the illusion of wealth and an easy future. Even the crash of Black Friday seemed a mere bump on the path to success, passing so quickly. And as interest rates came down and money became easier, our propensity to acquire things took over.
    And then something really bad happened. Our homes started to rise in value and we learned through new methods of financial engineering that we could borrow against what seemed like their ever-rising value, to finance consumption today.
    We became Blimpie from the Popeye cartoons of our youth: “I will gladly repay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.”
    Not for us the lay-away programs of our parents, patiently paying something each week or month until the desired object could be taken home. Come to think of it, I am not sure if my kids (15 through 32) have ever even heard of a lay-away program, not with credit cards so easy to obtain. Next family brunch, I will explain this quaint concept. (Interestingly, I heard about a revival of the concept on CNBC radio, coming back from dropping Trey off at school this morning. Everything old is new again.)
    As a banking system, we made choices. We created all sorts of readily available credit, and packaged it in convenient, irresistible AAA-rated securities and sold them to a gullible world. We created liar loans, no-money-down loans, and no-documentation loans and expected them to act the same way that mortgages had in the past. What were the rating agencies thinking? Where were the adults supervising the sand box?
    (Oh, wait a minute. DThat’s the same group of regulators who now want more power and money.)
    It is not as if all this was done in some back alley by seedy-looking characters. This was done on TV and in books and advertisements. I remember the first time I saw an ad telling me to call this number to borrow up to 125% of the value of my home, and wondering how this could be a good idea.
    Turns out it can be a great idea for the salesmen, if they can package those loans into securities and sell them to foreigners, with everyone making large commissions on the way. The choice was to make a lot of money with no downside consequences to yourself. What teenager could say no?
    Greenspan keeping rates low aided and abetted that process. Starting two wars and pushing through a massive health-care package, along with no spending control from the Republican Party, ran up the fiscal deficits.
    Allowing credit default swaps to trade without an exchange or regulations. A culture that viscerally believed that the McMansions they were buying were an investment and not really debt. Yes, we were adolescents at the party to end all parties.
    Not to mention an investment industry that tells their clients that stocks earn 8% a year real returns (the report I mentioned at the beginning goes into detail about this). Even as stocks have gone nowhere for ten years, we largely believe (or at least hope) that the latest trend is just the beginning of the next bull market.
    It was not that there were no warnings. There were many, including from your humble analyst, who wrote about the coming train wreck that we are now trying to clean up. But those warnings were ignored.
    Actually, ignored is a nice way to put it. Derision. Scorn. Laughter. And worse, dismissal as a non-serious perpetual perma-bear. My corner of the investment-writing world takes a very thick skin.
    The good times had lasted so long, how could the trend not be correct? It is human nature to believe the current trend, especially a favorable one that helps us, will continue forever.
    And just like a teenager who doesn’t think about the consequences of the current fun, we paid no attention. We hadn’t experienced the hard lessons of our elders, who learned them in the depths of the Depression. This time it was different. We were smarter and wouldn’t make those mistakes. Didn’t we have the research of Bernanke and others, telling us what to avoid?
    In millions of different ways, we all partied on. It wasn’t exclusively a liberal or a conservative, a rich or apoor, a male or a female addiction. We all borrowed and spent. We did it as individuals, and we did it as cities and states and countries.
    We ran up unfunded pension deficits at many local and state funds, to the tune of several trillion dollars and rising. We have a massive, tens of trillions of dollars, bill coming due for Social Security and Medicare, starting in the next 5-7 years, that makes the current crisis pale in comparison. We now seemingly want to add to this by passing even more spending programs that will only make the hole deeper.
    Frugality is the New Normal
    I could go on and on, but I think you get the point. The time for good choices was a decade ago. It would have been more difficult at the time, so that is not what we did. And now we wake up and are faced with a set of choices, none of them good.
    Reality is staring back in the mirror at the American consumer, and especially the Boomer generation. The psyche of the American consumer has been permanently seared. We are watching savings beginning to rise and consumer spending patterns change for the first time in generations. Even as the authorities try to prod consumers back into old habits, they are not responding. Borrowing and credit are actually falling. Banks, for whatever reason, now want borrowers to actually be able to pay them back. Go figure.
    Frugality is the new normal. We are resetting the underpinnings of a consumer-driven society to a new level. It will require a major overhaul of our economy. The normal drivers of growth – consumer spending, business investment, and exports – are all weak, and it is only because of massive government spending that the second quarter was not as bad as the two previous quarters and that the coming quarter will be positive.
    But what then? How long can we continue with 10%-plus GDP deficits? We have an economy that is in a Statistical Recovery, fueled by government largesse. In the real world, we are watching unemployment rise, and it is likely to do so through the middle of next year. Deflation is in the air. Capacity utilization is near all-time lows. Housing numbers are only bouncing because of the government program of large tax credits for first-time home buyers and lower home prices. It will be years before construction is significant.
    We will be faced with a choice this fall and early next year. If you take away the government spending, the potential for falling back into a recession is quite high, given the underlying weakness in the economy. A few hundred billion for increased and extended unemployment benefits will not be enough to stem the tide. There will be a groundswell for yet another stimulus package. Another 10% of GDP deficit is quite likely for next year.
    As I (and Woody Brock) have made very clear in these e-letters, deficits that are higher than nominal GDP cannot continue without dire consequences. Good friend Richard Russell writes today:
    “The US national debt is now over $11 trillion dollars. The interest on our national debt is now $340 billion. This is about at 3.04% rate of interest. In ten years the Obama administration admits that they will add $9 trillion to the national debt. That would take it to $20 trillion. Let’s say that by some miracle the interest on the national debt in 10 years will still be 3.09%. That would mean that the interest on the national debt would be $618 billion a year or over one billion a day. No nation can hold up in the face of those kinds of expenses. Either the dollar would collapse or interest rates would go through the roof.”
    That would be at least 30% of the national budget. How would your household do, paying that much as interest? How can you operate when interest payments are 30% or more of the budget? Do you borrow to pay the interest? And the Obama administration openly admits to deficits of over a trillion a year for the next ten years, under very rosy growth assumptions. Anyone outside of Washington and rosy-eyed economists think we will grow 4% next year? I am not seeing many hands go up.
    And Then We Face the Real Problem
    If we do not maintain high deficits, it is likely we fall back into recession. Yet if we do not control spending, we risk running up a debt that becomes very difficult to finance by conventional means. Monetizing the debt can only work for a few trillion here or there. At some point, the bond market will simply fall apart. And it could happen quickly. Think back to how fast things fell apart in the summer of 2007. When perception of the potential for inflation changes, it changes things fast.
    The problem is that we are now in a very deflationary world. Deleveraging, too much capacity, high and rising unemployment, falling real incomes, and more are all the classic pieces of the formula for deflation.
    Let’s look at what my friend Nouriel Roubini recently wrote. I think he hit the nail on the head:
    “A combination of higher official indebtedness and monetization has the potential to yield the worst of all worlds, pushing up long-term rates and generating increased inflation expectations before a convincing return to growth takes hold. An early return to higher long-term rates will crowd out private demand, as lending rates on mortgages and personal and corporate loans rise too. It is unlikely that actual inflation will emerge this year or even next, but inflation expectations as reflected in long-term interest rates could well be rising later in 2010. This would represent a serious threat to economic recovery, which is predicated on the idea that the actual borrowing rates that individuals and businesses pay will remain low for an extended period.
    “Yet the alternative – the early withdrawal of the stimulus drug that governments have been dispensing so freely – is even more serious. The present administration believes that deflation is a worse threat than inflation. They are right to think that. Trying to rebuild public finances at a deflationary moment – a time when unemployment is rising, and private demand is still contracting – could be catastrophic, turning recovery into renewed recession.”
    There are no good choices. Nouriel, optimist that he is (note sarcasm), suggests that there is a possibility that the government can manage expectations by showing a clear path to fiscal responsibility that can be believed. And thus the bond markets do not force rates higher, thereby thwarting recovery.
    And technically he is right. If there were adults supervising the party, it might be possible. But there are not. The teenagers are in control. Instead of fiscal discipline, we are hearing increased demands for more spending. Please note that the very rosy future-deficit assumptions assume the end of the Bush tax cuts at the close of 2010. But raising taxes back to the level of 2000 does not make the projected future budget deficits go away.
    I mean, seriously, does anyone think Pelosi or Reid are going to lead us to fiscal constraint? Obama talks a good game, but he has not offered a serious deficit-reduction proposal, other than further tax increases. And by serious, I mean we need cuts on the order of several hundred billion dollars. The Republicans lost their way and their power (deservedly, in my opinion). Just as at the high school prom, the very few adults are being ignored.
    It is the proverbial rock and the hard place. Cut the stimulus too soon and we slide back into a deeper recession. Let the budget spin out of control for a few years and we will see inflation return, with higher rates and a recession. Raise taxes by 1.5-2% of GDP in 2010 and we are shoved back into recession.
    There are no good choices. If we do the right thing and cut the deficit, it means very hard choices. Can we keep our commitments to two wars and our massive defense budget? Medicare and Social Security reform are not painless. Education? Research? The “stimulus”? But cutting the deficit by hundreds of billions while raising taxes by even more than is already in the works, is not the formula for sustainable recovery.
    Have we grown up? Are there adults in the room? Sadly, I don’t think there are enough. We are still a nation of teenagers. We will do whatever we can to avoid the pain today. We will kick the can down the road, hoping for a miracle. Will we grow up? Yes, but the lessons learned will be hard.
    There are no statistical signs of an impending recession. We are not going to get an inverted yield curve this time, which made it relatively easy for me to predict recessions in 2000 and 2006. We are in a deflationary, deleveraging world. A far different world than in the past.
    I see little room for us to avoid a double-dip recession. It would take the skill and speed of former Cowboys running back Tony Dorsett hitting a very small hole in the line to break us into the open. I see no running back in our national leadership with such ability. As I have outlined above, recession could be triggered again in any number of very different economic environments. It all depends on the choices we make. But the choices lead to the same consequences, at least in my opinion.
    As I wrote in August 2000 and August 2006, I write again in August 2009: there is a recession in our future. I was early both of those times and I am early now, maybe two years early, though I doubt it. And as I pointed out both of those last times, the stock market drops an average of over 40% during a recession. When I was on Kudlow in October of 2006, I was given a hard time about my recession call and prediction of a bear market. I think it was John Rutherford who dismissed my bearish vision. And he was right for the next three quarters, as the market proceeded to rise another 20%. I looked foolish to many, but I maintained my views.
    You have choices. You can buy and hold (buy and hope?) or you can develop a strategic alternative. The next bear market, as I wrote in 2003 and in Bull’s Eye Investing, will likely be the bottom. (It takes at least three of them to really take us to the bottom.) But the next one will change perceptions for a long time. Valuations will drop. Savings will rise even more. And a generation will grow up. The adults will return. Chastened. Scarred. Shaken. But we will Muddle Through. That is what we do. Even my teenagers.
    Choose wisely.
    Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, New Orleans, Detroit, and More
    Only a month ago my fall schedule looked surprisingly light. And then reality hit. I will be at the Schwab conference in San Diego on September 15. If you are going to be there, drop me a note. That is my only trip in September. But then it gets interesting. I celebrate my 60th birthday the first weekend of October, then fly to New Orleans to be at the annual New Orleans Conference, October 8-11. The speaker line-up is better than ever. I find this to be one of the best conferences I go to very year. I have been attending on and off for over 25 years. You should think about this one.
    Then I will spend the next weekend in Detroit, then probably go to New York, then Philadelphia for a CMG conference October 20, then down to Houston, over to Orlando, stop to change clothes and pack at home, and then fly off on a whirlwind trip to Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay, speaking at a series of CFA conferences. Orlando in mid-November … and nothing else so far. Switzerland and London in January.
    I recently did an interview with King World News that was quite frankly one of the best interviews I have ever done. Eric King really got me going. It is in two parts. I give you the link to the first part, and the second is in their archives. There are also interviews with a very serious group of names. I am flattered to be included. Click here.
    It is time to hit the send button. I am resisting the temptation to launch into politics, so I need to quit before I do. Suffice it to say, we could see some big changes as we work through our teenage years, back to adulthood.
    Speaking of good choices, the wedding last weekend was fabulous. I am delighted with my new son-in-law. Life goes on, even as my kids struggle to get enough hours of work and money. Henry is at UPS, and work hours are way down and they have a new son. Chad finally got a new job, which may give him enough hours to survive, but not a lot of money. For those of you who think I live in an ivory tower, I do have a view into the lives of seven kids who are very real people, as well as those of lots of friends. I am very well aware of how tough it is out there, and realize how blessed I am.
    You have a great week. Tomorrow I get to go the Dallas Cowboys game in the new stadium in a suite, courtesy of a friend who got the seats from Jerry Jones himself. Not sure where, but it sounds cool. Sometimes life gives you lucky breaks.
    Your amazed to still be writing after all these years analyst,

    John Mauldin
    [email protected]
    Copyright 2009 John Mauldin. All Rights Reserved

    Note: The generic Accredited Investor E-letters are not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and Millennium Wave Investments. It is intended solely for accredited investors who have registered with Millennium Wave Investments and Altegris Investments at www.accreditedinvestor.ws or directly related websites and have been so registered for no less than 30 days. The Accredited Investor E-Letter is provided on a confidential basis, and subscribers to the Accredited Investor E-Letter are not to send this letter to anyone other than their professional investment counselors. Investors should discuss any investment with their personal investment counsel. John Mauldin is the President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA), which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states. John Mauldin is a registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS), an FINRA registered broker-dealer. MWS is also a Commodity Pool Operator (CPO) and a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB). Millennium Wave Investments is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. Millennium Wave Investments cooperates in the consulting on and marketing of private investment offerings with other independent firms such as Altegris Investments; Absolute Return Partners, LLP; and Plexus Asset Management. Funds recommended by Mauldin may pay a portion of their fees to these independent firms, who will share 1/3 of those fees with MWS and thus with Mauldin. Any views expressed herein are provided for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest with any CTA, fund, or program mentioned here or elsewhere. Before seeking any advisor’s services or making an investment in a fund, investors must read and examine thoroughly the respective disclosure document or offering memorandum. Since these firms and Mauldin receive fees from the funds they recommend/market, they only recommend/market products with which they have been able to negotiate fee arrangements.
    Send to a Friend | Print Article | View as PDF | Permissions/Reprints

    You have permission to publish this article electronically or in print as long as the following is included:

    John Mauldin, Best-Selling author and recognized financial expert, is also editor of the free Thoughts From the Frontline that goes to over 1 million readers each week. For more information on John or his FREE weekly economic letter go to: http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/learnmore

    To subscribe to John Mauldin’s E-Letter please click here:
    http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/subscribe.asp

    To change your email address please click here:
    http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/change.asp

    If you would ALSO like changes applied to the Accredited Investor E- Letter, please include your old and new email address along with a note requesting the change for both e-letters and send your request to [email protected]

    To unsubscribe please refer to the bottom of the email.

    PAST RESULTS ARE NOT INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THERE IS RISK OF LOSS AS WELL AS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR GAIN WHEN INVESTING IN MANAGED FUNDS. WHEN CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS, INCLUDING HEDGE FUNDS, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER VARIOUS RISKS INCLUDING THE FACT THAT SOME PRODUCTS: OFTEN ENGAGE IN LEVERAGING AND OTHER SPECULATIVE INVESTMENT PRACTICES THAT MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INVESTMENT LOSS, CAN BE ILLIQUID, ARE NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PERIODIC PRICING OR VALUATION INFORMATION TO INVESTORS, MAY INVOLVE COMPLEX TAX STRUCTURES AND DELAYS IN DISTRIBUTING IMPORTANT TAX INFORMATION, ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE SAME REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AS MUTUAL FUNDS, OFTEN CHARGE HIGH FEES, AND IN MANY CASES THE UNDERLYING INVESTMENTS ARE NOT TRANSPARENT AND ARE KNOWN ONLY TO THE INVESTMENT MANAGER.

    John Mauldin is the President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA) which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states. John Mauldin is a registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS) an NASD registered broker-dealer. MWS is also a Commodity Pool Operator (CPO) and a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB). Millennium Wave Investments is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. All material presented herein is believed to be reliable but we cannot attest to its accuracy. Investment recommendations may change and readers are urged to check with their investment counselors before making any investment decisions.

    Opinions expressed in these reports may change without prior notice. John Mauldin and/or the staffs at Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC may or may not have investments in any funds cited above. John Mauldin can be reached at 800-829-7273.
    ________________________________________
    EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here:
    http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/unsubscribe.asp
    Or send an email To: [email protected]
    This email was sent to [email protected]
    ________________________________________

    Thoughts from the Frontline
    3204 Beverly Drive
    Dallas, Texas 75205

    Richard C De Graff
    256 Ashford Road
    RER Eastford Ct 06242
    860-522-7171 Main Office
    800-821-6665 Watts
    860-315-7413 Home/Office
    [email protected]

    This report has been prepared from original sources and data which we believe reliable but we make no representation to its accuracy or completeness. Coburn & Meredith Inc. its subsidiaries and or officers may from time to time acquire, hold, sell a position discussed in this publications, and we may act as principal for our own account or as agent for both the buyer and seller.

  • Obama and the Holy Land

    Obama and the Holy Land

    at

    by Edward Bernard Glick

    When Lyndon Baines Johnson was a young congressman, he saved 42 Jews from the Nazis. Indirect evidence shows that he rescued another 400 Jews, including the famed orchestra conductor Erich Leinsdorf. While Johnson didn’t risk his life to save Jews, as European non-Jews did, there are those who believe that he should be honored in Yad Vashem, Jerusalem’s Holocaust Memorial Museum, for being what the Israelis call a Righteous Gentile.

    After the 1967 Arab-Israel Six Day War, when he was President, he met with Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin in Glassboro, New Jersey. Mr. Kosygin asked him why America supported Israel against the Arab world with all its population and with all its oil resources. LBJ replied: “Because we think it’s right.” The Russian leader shook his head in disbelief.

    In June 2009, in a speech in Cairo, President Barack Obama announced a historic American tilt toward the Arab and Muslim worlds. It is too early to tell if he, unlike his predecessors, believes in what has been known as the special relationship between America and Israel, However, most of his fellow Americans still believe in it. Not only did they rejoice when President Harry Truman made the United States the first country in the world to recognize Israeli independence in  May 1948, but they  allowed  both Republican and Democratic administrations to put their tax dollars where their feelings are.

    Since 1949, the United States has sent Israel over $100 billion in aid. This amount does not include funds from the Defense Department budget for joint military projects like the Arrow missile, for which Israel has received more than $1 billion since 1986. As far back as 1974, General George Keegan, a former chief of US Air Force intelligence, said that Israel’s contribution to the United States was “worth $1,000 for every dollar’s worth of aid we have granted her.” Perhaps he was thinking of the fully functioning Soviet SAM (surface to air) missile system that the Israelis captured in Egypt and shipped to the United States enabling America to counter a weapon that was shooting down U.S. airplanes during the Vietnam war. In 1979 more than 170 retired generals and admirals sent a letter to President Jimmy Carter urging him to recognize Israel as a valuable and dependable military ally.

    No matter what the state of the US economy, there has never been a demand by the American people to halt or diminish US aid to Israel. There is no such demand now.

    What are the historical, religious, cultural, political, and strategic reasons for all this? First of all, America’s Christians are the only ones who not only employ the term “Judeo-Christian heritage,” but who glory in its usage. Secondly, while the first British settlers in North America never called their settlements New Jerusalem, New Israel, or New Zion, as some of them had wished, as their descendants moved to the north, south, and west, they placed hundreds of Biblically derived names on the map of the future United States. Thus there is a Jericho in Alabama, an Eden in Arizona, a Samaria in Idaho, a Hebron in North Dakota, a Lake Sinai in South Dakota, a Jordan in Illinois, a Zoar in Massachusetts, an Elisha in Rhode Island, a Sodom in Ohio, a Bethlehem in Pennsylvania, a New Canaan in Connecticut, a Goshen County in Wyoming, and an Adam in Florida. Four places in four states are called Jerusalem. And no fewer than twenty-seven towns, cities, and counties are called Salem, which comes from the Hebrew word shalom, which means peace. No other country has so linked its geographic nomenclature with that of the Land of Israel.

    There are historical reasons for this. The Pilgrims read the Old Testament. Some did so in Hebrew. Their interest in the Hebrew and the Old Testament was shared by other Americans in later centuries. A student who couldn’t translate the Bible from Hebrew into Latin could not in the early days get into Harvard. A teacher who knew no Hebrew couldn’t become a faculty member at King’s College, the original name of Columbia University. Hebrew was once a compulsory subject at Yale, which has the Hebrew motto Urim V’turim (Light and Truth) on its crest. Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon faith, studied Hebrew. In 1902 Secretary of State John Hay wrote a handwritten letter to an Indiana Jew in Hebrew. In the twentieth century Edmund Wilson, the great American social and literary critic, was a student of Hebrew.

    Now, the United States has not supported restored Jewish sovereignty in the Middle East merely because many of its more educated Christian citizens knew Hebrew several centuries ago, or because a tiny fraction of them know it now. However, the Hebrew/Old Testament connection in America’s intellectual history certainly has nourished the soil in which America’s support for modern Israel sprouted.

    During the American Revolution, clergymen compared the colonists’ fight with King George III to the plight of the ancient Israelites in the Egypt of the Pharaohs. After the Revolution, Christians in all walks of life suggested forms of governance that were similar to their perceptions of those of ancient Israel, and there were those who called for Jewish political restoration in Palestine.

    In 1818 Thomas Kennedy, a Catholic legislator, asked during a presentation in favor of equality for Maryland’s Jews: “May we not hope that the banners of the children of Israel shall again be unfurled on the walls of Jerusalem on the Holy Hill of Zion?” In 1819 John Adams wrote to a Jewish citizen: “I really wish the Jews again in Judea an independent nation.” In 1845 Brigham Young proclaimed: “The Jews among all nations are hereby commanded, in the name of the Messiah, to repair to return to Jerusalem in Palestine . . . and also to organize and establish their own political government.”

    In 1891, five years before Dr. Theodor Herzl published his Der Judenstaat and six years before he convened the first World Zionist Congress, an American Gentile, William E. Blackstone, publicly transformed what had been mainly religious and emotional yearnings of Jews for Palestine into a political manifestation of Jewish nationalism and Jewish self-determination. Blackstone sent President Benjamin Harrison a petition entitled “Palestine for the Jews.” It was signed by 400 hundred of the most prominent Americans. If the Great Powers, it asked, could, in the Berlin Treaty of 1878, give Bulgaria to the Bulgarians and Serbia to the Serbs, “does not Palestine as rightfully belong to the Jews?”

    Today we associate Christian Zionism with the Christian Evangelicals. They are now in fact the most pro-Jewish and pro-Israel segment of American Christendom. But the first American Christian to call himself a Zionist was the Reverend Dr. Francis J. Clay Moran, in a letter to the New York Times, published over a hundred years ago. After Moran came Adolph A. Berle, a former professor of applied Christianity at Tufts University, who, in 1918, published a book called The World Significance of a Jewish State. Harry Emerson Fosdick, of Union Theological Seminary, in 1927, wrote a book on Zionism called A Pilgrimage to Palestine. In 1929, John Haynes Holmes, minister of New York’s Community Church, published Palestine Today and Tomorrow: A Gentile’s Survey of Zionism. Dr. Walter Clay Loudermilk, the most renowned soil scientist, ecologist, and environmentalist of his day, also became a Christian Zionist.

    In the 1930s he traveled the world to study how people used their land and in what condition they passed it on to the next generation. When he came to British Palestine, he was so impressed by how the Jews treated their land that he wrote that if Moses had foreseen what was to become of the Earth, he “doubtless would have been inspired to deliver an Eleventh Commandment: ‘Thou shalt inherit the Holy Earth as a faithful steward, conserving its resources and productivity from generation to generation. . . . If any shall fail in this stewardship of the land, thy fruitful fields shall become sterile stony ground and wasting gullies, and thy descendants shall decrease and live in poverty or perish from off the face of the Earth.” Since the Jews of Palestine were obeying Loudermilk  Eleventh Commandment, he became an ardent Christian Zionist, publishing, in 1944, his bestseller, Palestine: Land of Promise.

    So it is America’s Christians, not America’s Jews, who made it politically correct for every American President since Woodrow Wilson and every American Congress since the early 1920s to support both the dream and the reality of a renascent Jewish state in the Middle East.

    President Obama has been trying, so far unsuccessfully, to tilt toward Iran. In a speech before the Turkish Parliament in April 2009, he said: “I have made it clear to the people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran that the United States seeks engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect.” This is the same Iran whose president denies the Holocaust and who wants Israel wiped off the face of the earth. Though the Israelis consider Iran’s nuclear weapons an existential threat, Mr. Obama is pressuring them not to attack preemptively. However, also in April 2009, Shimon Peres, the President of Israel, and the father of Israel’s nuclear weapons program, said that if Mr. Obama  will not soften the Iranian President’s approach “we’ll strike him.” While refusing to go into detail about the military option to foil Iran’s nuclear program, Mr. Peres did say that Israel could not carry out any strike against the Islamic republic without America. “We certainly cannot go it alone and we definitely can’t go against the U.S.”

    Mr. Obama is also tilting toward the Palestinians, even though the Norwegian Fafo Institute, the sponsor of the 1993 Oslo Middle East accords, recently found that a majority of Palestinians oppose a two-state solution. Thirty-three percent opt for Israel’s annihilation and 20 percent favor a Palestinian state that would entirely engulf Israel.

    For more than sixty years, American. presidents and the American people have been pro-Israel.  As recently as March 3, 2009, the Gallup Poll ranked Israel as the fourth preferred ally of the United States, behind Britain, Canada, and Japan. And as recently as August 10, 2009, seventy percent of Americans say that Israel is a U.S. ally, nearly twice the finding for Egypt, the most highly regarded Islamic country. Only 8 percent of Americans say Israel is an enemy, and 16 percent put it somewhere in between.

    So these questions arise: Has President Obama abandoned the special America-Israel relationship? Has he become so pro-Arab that he is anti-Israel, as almost two-thirds of the Israelis now believe, according to the University of Tel Aviv’s War and Peace Index of August 9, 2009? Is he, as the British writer Melanie Phillips has suggested, America’s first “pro-Islamist President?” Are America and Israel heading for a great confrontation, or at least for the greatest disagreement in the history of their relationship, as U.S. Middle East expert Robert Satloff recently told Newsweek magazine?

    On July 4, 2009 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said: “We have a brave relationship with the United States, a bond that President Obama himself defined as unbreakable. Indeed, our bond with the U.S. is unbreakable.” But that is not the belief of other prominent Israelis. They are not so sure that Israel has a friend in the White House. And they wonder if the connection with the United States is still a good one. For instance, Caroline Glick, the deputy managing editor of the Jerusalem Post, argues that “both in terms of pure economics and of the restrictions the Obama administration is now placing on Israeli use of U.S. technologies and munitions, maintaining U.S. military assistance makes less and less sense with each passing day. Israel may indeed be best served by simply ending its military assistance package. By making clear that it is not dependent on Obama’s kindness, it would be expanding its maneuvering room on other issues as well.” She is probably alluding to Iran.

    On the American side, Israel’s failure to defeat Hizbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza may be be interpreted as meaning that it is no longer a strong military power and is now a strategic liability rather than a strategic asset to the United States.

    Whatever the case, one thing is clear: Mr. Obama does not view Israel as Democratic Presidents Harry S. Truman, John F. Kennedy, and Lyndon B. Johnson did. Nor does he view it as Republican Presidents Richard M. Nixon and George W. Bush did. Until the end of his life, the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was the chief of staff of the Israel Army during the 1967 Six Day war, believed that Mr. Nixon saved the Jewish state. By warning the Soviets to stay out of the 1973 Yom Kippur War and by replacing the vast amounts of equipment that Israel lost during the first week of that war, Mr. Nixon made it possible for the Israelis to counterattack and beat their Egyptian foes.

    Anne Bayevsky, a senior fellow of the Hudson Institute, is convinced that Mr. Obama is “the most hostile sitting American president in the history of the state of Israel.” Similarly, John Bolton, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a former American ambassador to the United Nations, has written that “Relations between the U.S. and Israel are more strained than at any time since the 1956 Suez Canal crisis.” And Richard Baehr, the chief political correspondent of The American Thinker, feels that Mr. Obama treats “Israel more contemptuously than any President since the founding of the [Jewish] state.” On the other hand, on August 20, 2009 the Israeli news source Debka reported that President Obama has secretly assured Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu that confrontation between America and Israel is undesirable, and that relations between the White House and Mr. Netanyahu’s office will revert to their normal friendly level.

    We shall have to wait and see whether and the extent to which Ms. Bayevsky, Mr. Bolton, Mr. Baehr, and Debka are right or wrong. We shall also have to wait and see what happens if Israel , the modern reincarnation of the Jewish Holy Land, strikes Iran against the wishes of President Obama.

    Source: www.americanthinker.com/, 23 August 2009
  • A Georgian-Armenian Border Dispute?

    A Georgian-Armenian Border Dispute?

    By Ara Khachatourian on Aug 27th, 2009

    Print This |  ShareThis

    Armenia-Georgia border

    The complicated situation plaguing the Georgian regions bordering Armenia, known as the Armenian-populated Samtskhe-Javakhk region, is being compounded as Georgian authorities are prohibiting farmers there to work, essentially claiming that the land on which they live is Georgian territory.

    The focal point of this recent flare up is the border city of Bavra, whose residents were issued deeds by the Armenian State Committee on Real Estate from 1992 to 2004. But, because the Soviet demarcation of borders left a legal uncertainty, Georgia has intermittently annexed portions of that land and claimed it as its own by planting trees and vegetation and expanding its “forests.” This move is beeing seen as effectively seizing Armenian territory.

    This has created confusion in the area, with Armenian border guards not allowing Armenian residents of Bavra to cross the border, in an effort to not enflame matters, while on the other hand, Georgian border guards are being granted permission to arrest the people who have been living and working there for decades.

    Bavra community head Koriun Sumbulyan said that Georgian authorities have prevented the farmers to enter a 300-hectar lot on the “legally uncertain” area. This move has affected the economic well-being of the residents, who have appealed to the Armenian Foreign Ministry for assistance but have not received clear-cut answers.

    It is estimated that if the current status quo is not challenged and Georgian authorities are allowed to continue this “restructuring of the border,” Georgia could advance within the current Armenian border to the tune of 400 meters, where the boundaries of the Bavra village end.

    This revelation further enflames an already volatile situation for the majority-Armenian-populated region of Javakhk as a direct result of Tbilisi’s treatment of ethnic groups in Georgia. Javakhk Armenian community organizations have appealed to the central authorities and to the international community, thus far, to no avail.

    The Armenian government has reassured that the proper procedures were in place to address the issue, yet Armenia, since its independence has not had a clear strategy or policy toward Javakhk.

    Aside from the fallout from last summer’s war, which continues to have adverse effects on Armenia, Azeri and Turikic nations are increasing the population in the areas immediately bordering Armenia. In fact, on Wednesday, the Meskheti Community of Azerbaijan announced that it would be disbanding at the beginning of next year, because it has fulfilled its mission of populating the “displaced” Meskheti Turks in Georgia, “per Georgian law.”

    The Saakashvili administration has not learned its lesson from last year’s war and continues to embroil its population in conflicts fraught with intimidation and violation of basic human rights. Unfortunately, this behavior is only encouraged-and Armenian lives further endangered-partially by the flawed policies of the US, which has allowed Georgian authorities to take liberties that are outside of democratic norms.

    At the same time, the Armenian authorities’ unwillingness to engage in matters related to the threat facing the population of Javakhk, as well as Armenia’s border, exacerbates the situation further. It’s high time for a clear and concise policy toward Georgia, and more important a strategy on Javakhk.

  • SUKRU AYA’S LETTER TO OBAMA RESPONDING TO ANCA CLAIMS

    SUKRU AYA’S LETTER TO OBAMA RESPONDING TO ANCA CLAIMS

    https://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2009/08/2940-aya-s-letter-to-obama-versus-ancas.html

    August 28, 2009 ergun_s

    Much Esteemed and beloved Mr. President,

    Salute, regards, and sentiments from Türkiye, the country where your friendly visit, is treasured!

    As soon as I read the rude, accusatory, and outright disrespectful letter (see below) written to you by Kenneth V. Hachikian, Chairman of ANCA—a shady group currently under investigation by federal agencies for alleged campaign finance and lobbying violations—I felt compelled to write to you and put some light on penned slanders!

    The letter, [quite short of accustomed courtesy and respect when addressing the White House] was urging you to reject the recent ruling of a three judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case of Movsesian v. Versicherung A.G. (No. 07-56722, August 20, 2009), which struck down a California special-interest law providing remedies and tax exemptions to ethnic Armenians for alleged wrongs during an alleged genocide.

    I should like to emphasize that because of my affection to too many American or Turkish Armenians with whom I have shared many joys and sorrows of my life and continue to have warm, friendly relations, I have compiled a book using anti-Turkish, (mostly Armenian, American) and neutral sources, which took me some four years. A copy will be mailed to you by my friends in USA as annex to this letter, for your further guidance with more than 2000 verbatim excerpts from books, documents, articles etc. that cannot be refuted by any party. The book has been on the “Open Free E-Book Library” of “Armenians-1915.blogspot.com” “a small group of truth dedicated Turkish Armenians, striving for the normalization of relations and discovery of truth and protection of the present Turkish-Armenians friendly relations”, from the continuous interceptions of diaspora organizations, which for nearly a century have established a “trade or industry of marketing hatred and revenge”, and for which they collect a huge amount of money, some disposed as needed or embezzled during the process!

    Apparently, no one taught these Armenians about the separation of powers in U.S.A. and that it is un-American for the executive branch to contravene the judicial branch (or legislative branch). Such discriminated practices may be all right in Armenia, {a land-locked, poverty-stricken, corrupt, aggressive, and violent Armenia living on the donations and instructions by diaspora groups} but it is frowned upon in America.

    The disrespectful Armenian letter writer also seemed ignorant of the federal supremacy law, which says state laws cannot replace, void, or overrule federal laws. The wily and tricky Armenian lobby thought they found the short cut, by applying local political pressure to get a tailor-made state law to bypass all federal laws. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals saw to it, that those Armenian falsifiers got a good lesson on American government.

    The insolent Armenian letter writer, in asking the White House to interfere with the decision of U.S. Court of Appeals or evaluate a California State Law interpretation as superior to Federal Laws and U.S. Constitution, in effect, was forcing the U.S. Government to violate written bilateral agreements with the sovereign Republic of Turkey. Thus, the deceptive and tiny Armenian lobby was indirectly attempting to manipulate American foreign policy. Excuse, but in simple words, this is like “the tail or tail tip wagging the dog”!

    The expression, such as “Genocide era wrongs”, is not based on any judicial decision, but is set on “hearsay and forgeries” promoted deceptively by biased persons or organizations. My book has hundreds of examples. Armenians also fail to understand that hasty campaign pledges and responsibility of an office may differ after election, and sometimes diametrically opposing things. Overall, American interests always trump preferential or actually discriminatory demands of specific ethnic groups or lobbies! That said, a responsible, truth-defending President, is expected to investigate deeper any pledges made during election campaigns and refrain from unrealistic, untrue, unethical, unequal or biased pledges.

    The “Armenian Genocide” allegations are not supported by the verdict of any “competent tribunal” as set forth by the 1948 U.N. Convention. Such terminology, therefore, is not more than a political statement based on hearsay, forgeries, falsifications, fabrications, distortions, and outright lies. Not every killing or suffering is genocide. Not every war crime or hate crime is genocide. Not every photo, tall tale, documentary, film, book is genocide. Genocide verdict can only be given at a competent tribunal after due process where all sides are given a fair chance to tell its side of the story and cross-examine the evidence and witnesses. This was never done in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict. Armenians are trying to bypass legislation by applying political pressure. But it will not work! They will never come out on a bilateral commission of investigation or scholarly evaluation. On the contrary, the U.S. records in archives bear plenty evidence that the exact opposite is true, or that brutalities were mutual and mostly inflicted by the ancestors of the claimants as evidenced by their own books and historians!

    Armenian propaganda organizations such as ANCA, should be aware of the fact that the new Turkish Republic had agreed with U.S.A. on Dec. 24, 1923 to study all claims and compensate for the actual losses suffered by the U.S. Citizens, until that date. Their absence of knowledge is proof of their blind antagonism!

    ANCA should also be aware that a joint Committee had been empowered with another agreement dated October 25, 1934 and all U.S. citizens or claimants were given a deadline to submit their claims and evidences. The claims that had been submitted were meticulously verified. A further agreement of “Adjustment of Payment” No.168 dated Sept.8, 1937 was concluded with Turkey. U.S.A. confirmed with letter No.93, dated Sept..23, 1937 to the Republic of Turkey, that “…when the agreed amount is paid, Turkey will be fully discharged of the obligations previously agreed…”:

    Turkey had fulfilled the agreement; claimants had been accordingly paid and USA has no longer any lawful rights to request , 72 years later, additional indemnities for cases studied and settled in 1937!

    Accusing U.S. Governments for “complicity on genocide denial” is an arrogant insult to USA and Turkey, as long as the humiliation of “genocide” stands as a word in the air, never decided by a competent tribunal!

    ANCA organization does not have the immunity to call other parties “criminal”, unless the “crime is proven and the judicial verdict is at hand”. Declarations by some Parliaments or other legally irrelevant and/or unauthorized groups are political and have no judicial merit. They may stroke Armenian egos, but are, otherwise, worthless gestures of bias and bigotry, which are used as asset or assessment for collecting “donations for the cause”!..

    Vague expressions and accusations such as “race extermination or over 1.5 million Armenians lost their lives” stands much short of truths and the U.S. state archives refute them openly because:

    a- “American Military Mission to Armenia” (General Harbord) Report 1920 and Annex Report Nat. Archives 184.021/175 do not mention any “race extermination” but instead refer to “refinements of cruelty by Armenians to Muslims”.

    b- Joint US-Congress Resolution no. 192, April 22, 1922 relative to the activities of Near East Relief ending 31.12.1921, has unanimously resolved that 1,414,000 Armenians were alive. Moreover, (George Montgomery) a member of the US delegation at the Paris Conference had presented a detailed tabulation in 1919, with 1,104,000 Armenians alive, apart from those who had already immigrated to other countries.

    c- Reliable sources show that THE TOTAL ARMENIAN POPULATION in the (1914) Ottoman Empire was less than 1.3 MILLION (or up to a maximum of 1.5 millions) and hence it would be ANCA’s liability to “defy and annul these official U.S. State Records,” and give documentary evidence of which number is to be trusted!

    ANCA is charging the Obama administration of “blocking legal redress of U.S. citizens” without minimal proof. ANCA should be aware of the fact that the Obama administration is responsible for protecting the rights and interests of all true American citizens who took an oath when they were naturalized. In other words, the Obama Administration cannot be held responsible for losses such as of life, property, or inheritance by her citizens in “former countries” (before they were naturalized) from where they immigrated to the US! Prevailing cases of U.S. citizens were promptly settled by former USA Administrations at that time. This does not limit the “U.S. citizens from pursuing their personal claims individually in other countries” under their own liabilities. USA cannot disregard or deviate from her written obligations in international agreements under any ethnic pressure or others, such as by ANCA.

    If ANCA lobby organization is disappointed because Obama treats American citizens of Armenian ethnicity equally with all other American citizens and cannot extend special privileges to ANCA, then I am afraid, ANCA is giving priority to ANCA leaders’ private interests over the interests of American citizens over all.

    There is no place for any prejudice or antagonism in USA’s relations with other countries. It is hard to understand or justify why Armenian community is so fearful of “any type of investigation” (by historical commission or others) unless, of course, there are facts that Armenians do not wish to be brought into the light.

    Obama Administration has taken an oath to serve all American citizens, equally, and to protect their overall interests. A U.S. president cannot support unproven allegations or hearsay that may tarnish American values like justice, fairness, openness, honesty, equality, and compassion for all. The Obama Administration, I hope, will never be part of “any prejudice or antagonism” against any ethnicity, nation, race, or faith on earth!

    I welcome ANCA’s offer to discuss “these matters personally in greater detail” when Armenian falsifiers would support White House’s desire to hear what “other American citizens” may have to say equally in a fair, friendly and civilized conference!

    Most Cordially and Sincerely,

    Sukru Server Aya

    [Author: “The Genocide of Truth” ISBN 978-975-6516-24-9 Istanbul Commerce University Publication 2008]

    Annex:
    a- ANCA’s letter to the White House
    b- Book separately mailed from USA, marked on envelope (Annex of the letter by Sukru S. Aya )

    NOTE: The Armenian Community in Turkey and many Armenians in the world, who can see the personal ego and financial interest of the diaspora, are disturbed by the latter’s arrogance and fomenting frictions on which they thrive! My friends and I are dedicated to decency, truth, reason and compassion and despise “hate merchants”

    c.c.:
    a- U.S.A. Embassy – Çankaya – Ankara (Book formerly presented)
    b- U.S.A. General Consulate – Istanbul – – – – – – -do-
    c- T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlıgı (Foreign Office) Ankara – – -do-

    ***

    And here is the letter written by ANCA, the same organization previously headed by a convicted Armenian terrorist, Topalian, who shamelessly stored explosives next to a school, daycare, and a gas station in Ohio until caught in the act by the FBI:

    ***

    ANCA’s letter to Obama
    The Honorable Barack Obama
    President of the United States
    The White House
    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
    Washington, D.C. 20500

    Dear Mr. President:

    I am writing to urge you to take immediate steps to publicly reject the flawed ruling of a three judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case of Movsesian v. Versicherung A.G. (No. 07-56722, August 20, 2009), that struck down a California law providing remedies for Armenian Genocide-era wrongs, and argued that state level recognition of this crime contradicts “express federal policy” and is therefore unconstitutional.

    You bear direct responsibility, Mr. President, by virtue of your failure to keep your repeated, crystal clear pledges to recognize the Armenian Genocide, for the Court’s judgment that it is the official policy of the Executive Branch of the United States government to actively oppose proper recognition of this crime and, upon this basis, to thus prohibit states from passing laws to help Armenian Genocide-era victims seek to reclaim lost or stolen property. The Court’s interpretation of your broken promise marks an unmistakable and historic low in our government’s long complicity in Turkey’s campaign of genocide denial.

    As you know, over 1.5 million Armenians lost their lives and, of course, many more were deprived of their property as a result of the Ottoman Turkish government’s systematic and deliberate campaign of race extermination. It is particularly tragic, given the thorough understanding that you have articulated regarding the moral, historical, and political meaning of this crime, that, it is under your leadership that the United States government is today not only engaged in complicity in genocide denial, but also, according to a judicial ruling, actively working to ensure that the remaining survivors and their families are denied avenues to seek to reclaim property lost during these massacres.

    Your Administration’s policies, as understood and affirmed by the Court, in addition to blocking legal redress for U.S. citizens, have now opened the door—in unprecedented and profoundly dangerous ways—for interests aligned with the Turkish government to seek to roll back several generations of American civil society efforts to mark this tragedy, including through formal recognition by 42 U.S. states. As such, we once again urge you to publicly reject the Court’s interpretation of your Administration’s position and call upon you to honor your covenant with American voters to properly recognize the Armenian Genocide.

    In closing, I would like to stress to you, once again, how broadly and profoundly disappointing your failure to honor your many commitments on issues of special concern to Armenian American citizens has been for the ANCA, a grassroots organization that, based upon your track record and series of publicly stated commitments, enthusiastically endorsed your candidacy and successfully mobilized an unprecedented community drive to help secure your election. In the wake of your many broken campaign commitments, your silence in the face of this profoundly misguided judicial action would compound the Armenian American community’s sense of betrayal regarding your Administration’s behind the scenes efforts to block adoption of the Armenian Genocide Resolution, your White House’s use of Turkey’s cynically-inspired “roadmap” to defer U.S. recognition, and your State Department’s shameless pressure on Armenia to accept the artificial “historical commission” that Ankara has long advanced to prevent the proper recognition of this crime.

    We remain ready, as we have shared with you on a number of past occasions, to meet with you to discuss these matters personally and in greater detail.

    [signed]
    Kenneth V. Hachikian
    Chairman

    ***

    The Honorable Barack Obama
    President of the United States
    The White House
    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
    Washington, D.C. 20500

    Dear Mr. President:

    This is to refute the baseless claims and arrogant demands made by the Armenians in a letter to you recently. Kenneth V. Hachikian, chairman of ANCA –the same organization previously headed by a convicted Armenian terrorist, Topalian, who shamelessly stored explosives next to a school, daycare, and a gas station in Ohio until caught in the act by the FBI—

    The discourteous Armenian letter was urging you to reject the ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case of Movsesian v. Versicherung A.G. (No. 07-56722, August 20, 2009), which found a California partsian law providing remedies to ethnic Armenians in life insurance matters during an alleged genocide. This bizarre demand, a clear evidence of lack of understanding of American government, totally contradicts the separation of powers in U.S.A. The impolite Armenian letter also seemed clueless about the federal supremacy law, which stipulates that state laws cannot void or overrule federal laws.

    Demanding that the U.S. Government violate bilateral agreements with the sovereign Republic of Turkey by asking the White House to interfere with the decision of U.S. Court of Appeals is simply un-American.

    Furthermore, the term genocide is not based on a verdict by a competent tribunal and reflects a biased interpretation of WWI events, ignoring the six T’s of the Turkish-Armenian conflict [i.e. tumult (revolts), terrorism, treason, territorial demands, Turkish suffering, and TERESET, temporary resettlement order of May 27, 1915.] Not all killing, suffering, and war crimes are genocide. For a genocide verdict, intent of the perpetrator must be proven at a competent court after due process. That was never done in the Turkish-Armenian conflict. The “Armenian Genocide” allegations are political charges based on hearsay, forgeries, falsifications, fabrications, distortions, and outright lies. Turks suffered, too, at the hands of Armenians and the U.S. archives of the era can attest to that.

    Most importantly, ANCA should learn that the Turkish Republic had agreed with U.S.A. on Dec. 24, 1923 to investigate and redress all claims of losses suffered by the U.S. Citizens, until that date. A joint Committee, empowered with another agreement dated October 25, 1934, did collect and verify all submittals, upon which a third agreement of “Adjustment of Payment” No.168 dated Sept.8, 1937 was concluded with Turkey. U.S.A. confirmed with letter No.93, dated Sept..23, 1937 to the Republic of Turkey, that “…when the agreed amount is paid, Turkey will be fully discharged of the obligations previously agreed…” Turkey had fulfilled the agreement by paying the claimants and the matter was permanently and irrevocably settled.

    If you ever decide to meet that nagging, demanding, deceptive ANCA, please do yourself a favor and invite us, Turkish-Americans, as represented by ATAA, FTAA, and others, to the same meeting and let us dismantle their bogus Armenian claims effortlessly… and with pleasure.

    Sincerely,

    Ergun KIRLIKOVALI
    ATAA, President-Elect
    FTAA, Western Regional Director
    ATASC, Past President