Month: June 2009

TIMELY RESPONCE TO CANADIAN UNIVERSITY

SUBJECT: https://www.turkishnews.com/en/content/2009/06/02/canada-ryerson-apologizes-for-ataov-event/

To: Sheldon Levy, President and Vice-Chancellor, [email protected]

Cc: Kanizehn Wadia, Executive Secretary to the President, [email protected]
Erin McGinn, Director, Office of the President, [email protected]
Carrie-Ann Bissonnette, Special Assistant, Events & Special Projects, [email protected]
Alan Shepard, Provost and Vice President Academic – [email protected]
Dr. Heather Lane Vetere, Vice Provost, Students – [email protected]
Terry Gillin, Dean of sociology, [email protected]
Mustafa Koc, Professor, Sociology Department, [email protected]

June 3, 2009

Re: Intolerance to reasoned, scholarly debate

Dear President Levy:

I am responding to the apology you issued to the Armenian students for the scholarly seminar organized by the Turkish students at Ryerson University on February 18, 2009, featuring Professor Turkkaya Ataov, a researcher who authored of more than 80 books. I found your apology biased, unfair, and unscholarly. Here are my reasons and thoughts:

BIAS IN THE TERM “ARMENIAN GENOCIDE”

If one cherishes values like fairness, objectivity, truth, and honesty, then one should really use the term “Turkish-Armenian conflict”. Reducing this complex human tragedy that affected all the people of the area down to “Do you accept or deny Armenian Genocide” simply shows one’s anti-Turkish bias. The question should be re-phrased “What is your stand on the Turkish-Armenian conflict?”

Turks document it clearly that it was an inter communal warfare mostly fought by Turkish and Armenian irregulars, a civil war which is engineered, provoked, and waged by the Armenian revolutionaries, with active support from Russia, England, France, and other countries, as well as Western media and missionaries, all interested in the vast resources of the collapsing Ottoman Empire for different reasons and to varying degrees, against a backdrop of a raging world war.

Armenians, on the other hand, ignoring Armenian agitation, raids, rebellions, terrorism, treason, territorial demands, and Turkish victims killed by Armenians, claim that it was a one way genocide, a claim never tested at a court of law but mostly based on hearsay and forgeries.

GENOCIDE ALLEGATIONS IGNORE “THE SIX T’S OF THE TURKISH-ARMENIAN CONFLICT”

While some in unsuspecting public may be forgiven for taking the blatant and ceaseless Armenian propaganda at face value and believing Armenian falsifications merely because they are repeated so often, it is difficult and painful for someone like me, the son of Turkish survivors on both maternal and paternal sides, whose story is hardly ever heard due to censorship induced by Armenian pressure groups.

Those seemingly endless “War years” of 1912-1922 brought three separate but consecutive wars on Ottoman soil (The Balkans, WWI, and the Independence Wars) and wide-spread death and destruction on to all Ottoman citizens. No Turkish family was left touched, mine certainly included. Those nameless, faceless Turkish victims are killed for a second time today with politically motivated and baseless charges of Armenian genocide. Those wars were brought onto Turks, not vice-versa, fought on Turkish soil, not in England, France, or Russia, and Turks were only defending their home, not out for conquest.

ALLEGATIONS OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ARE RACIST AND DISHONEST HISTORY

They are racist because they ignore the Turkish dead: about 3 million during WWI; more than half a million of them at the hands of Armenian nationalists.

And the allegations of Armenian genocide are dishonest because they simply dismiss

THE SIX T’S OF THE TURKISH-ARMENIAN CONFLICT:

1) TUMULT (as in numerous Armenian armed uprisings, 1878-1921)

2) TERRORISM (by well-armed Armenian nationalists and militias victimizing Ottoman-Muslims, 1882-1922)

3) TREASON (Armenians joining the invading enemy armies, 1914-1921)

4) TERRITORIAL DEMANDS (where Armenians were a minority, not a majority, attempting to establish Greater Armenia, the would-be first apartheid of the 20th Century with a Christian minority ruling over a Muslim majority, 1878- present )

5) TURKISH SUFFERING AND LOSSES (i.e. those caused by the Armenian nationalists: 524,000 Muslims, mostly Turks, met their tragic end at the hands of Armenian revolutionaries during WWI, documented by the Turkish Historical Society. This figure is not to be confused with about 2.5 million Muslim dead who lost their lives due to non-Armenian causes during WWI.)

6) TERESET (temporary resettlement) triggered by the first five T’s above and amply documented as such; not to be equated to the Armenian misrepresentations as genocide.)

VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS AMOUNTS TO LYNCHING

Those who take the Armenian “allegations” of genocide at face value seem to also ignore the following:

1- Genocide is a legal, technical term precisely defined by the U.N. 1948 convention (Like all proper laws, it is not retroactive to 1915.)

2- Genocide verdict can only be given by a “competent court” after “due process” where both sides are properly represented and evidence mutually cross examined.

3- For a genocide verdict, the accusers must prove “intent” at a competent court and after due process. This could never be done by the Armenians whose evidence mostly fall into five major categories: hearsay, mis-representations, exaggerations, forgeries, and “other”.

4- Such a “competent court” was never convened in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict and a genocide verdict does not exist (save a Kangaroo court in occupied Istanbul in 1920 where partisanship, vendettas, and revenge motives left no room for due process.)

5- Genocide claim is political, not historical or factual. It reflects bias against Turks. Therefore, the term genocide must be used with the qualifier “alleged”, for scholarly objectivity and truth.

POLITICAL LYNCHING OF THE TURKS BY ARMENIANS TODAY

Recognizing Armenian claim as genocide, therefore, will deeply insult Turkish-Canadians and Turks around the globe and poison the otherwise excellent relations currently enjoyed between the Canada and Turkey. It will, no doubt, please Armenians but disappoint, insult, and outrage Turkey, one of Canada’s closest allies and a partner in NATO. Turks stood shoulder to shoulder with Canadians in Gulf War, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and more. Genocide charge, unproven and unjustified, is the worst insult that can be dished out to an entire nation and a democracy respecting human rights, not to mention a close friend, an staunch ally , and a reliable partner in a troubled part of the world.

History is not a matter of ” gut feelings, thoughts, beliefs, conviction, consensus, political resolutions, or propaganda.” History is a matter of unbiased research, honest peer review, thoughtful debate, and meticulous scholarship. Even historians, by the U.N. definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is a special task reserved for a “competent court” with its legal expertise and due process.

What we witness today amounts to lynching of the Turks by Armenians to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry. Values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, balance, honesty, and freedom of speech are stumped under the fanatic Armenian feet.

Those who claim genocide verdict today, based on the much discredited Armenian evidence, are actually engaging in “conviction and execution without due process”. Last time I checked with the dictionary, that was the definition of “lynching”.

Isn’t it about time to stop fighting the First World War after almost a century and give peace a real chance?

Perhaps an even better question is, isn’t it time to allow the historians, researchers, and scholars to take over this debate?

The capability to explore and discuss contentious issues in a rational, scholarly manner is one of the trademarks that makes a University community a stimulating and exciting place. Your apology to Armenian students, implying that the Turkish-Armenian controversy should be represented like settled history in line with untested, unproven Armenian allegations, deals a blow to academic freedom and freedom of speech, thus vibrancy of a university.

After all, what good is a university if reasoned, scholarly debate is not allowed?

Peace,

ERGUN KIRLIKOVALI

Turkish Forum Advisory Board Member

Son of Turkish Survivors from Both Maternal & Paternal Side

www.turkishforum.com

www.turkla.com

www.ethocide.com

0000000000000000000000000000

CANADA: Ryerson Apologizes for Ataov Event

Ryerson Apologizes for Ataov Event and Reaffirms its commitment to uphold the Truth

Toronto, Ontario; On February 18, 2009, The Department of Sociology at Ryerson University, and the Federation of Canadian Turkish Associations organized an evening lecture on campus titled “Elaborations on Turkish strategies to dealing with issues around Armenian Allegations and beyond”. The lecture was delivered by Professor Turkkaya Ataov, a leading denier of the Armenian Genocide. The lecture was equivalent to Neo-Nazi propaganda presented to deny the Jewish Holocaust. Prof. Ataov trivialized the reality of the Armenian Genocide and presented the usual Turkish Government’s views.Ryerson University’s student body was outraged by the fact that such an event had been cosponsored by a department of their university and raised concerns through letters and by signing petitions which included names of approximately 300 Ryerson students.

After several meetings with department heads and administration, Dr. Sheldon Levy, the president of Ryerson University, in a letter to Sally Sahagian, the president of the Armenian Students’ Association at Ryerson University, apologized to the Ryerson community by stating, “On behalf of Ryerson University, I would like to apologize for the pain and suffering experienced in particular by the members of the Armenian.

Community as a result of this event” He then assured the student body that the university’s views were in line with that of the Canadian Government, the International Association of Genocide Scholars and the hundreds of historians and experts researching the topic internationally. Dr. Levy stated, “Ryerson University supports Prime Minster Harper’s statement on behalf of all Canadians that the Armenian Genocide is a historical fact, unquestionably part of the historical record with tremendous suffering.”

Ryerson University’s response indicated that although the university is a space where students can practice their freedom of speech, the university will not become an accomplice to racism and genocide denial. This form of hate propaganda has no place in our academic and scholarly circles.

The administration of Ryerson University, through its principled stand, has proven to remain true to the role of the university as an institution committed to upholding the truth. The Armenian Students’ Association at Ryerson University together with all its members and the Armenian Community at large would like to thank the Ryerson University administration for identifying genocide denial as a threat to academia and society at large, consequently taking a principled stand against the crime of genocide.

For more info, please contact Sally Sahagian – [email protected].

29 May 2009 by Press Office

In America, there are “equal access” and “”equal time” laws governing libelous attacks in public. I am sure similar laws are in the books in Canada, too. The first step should be a firm, informative, fair, polite, but demanding letter, worded by a lawyer (or law firm) specializing in freedom of speech issues in Canada should be sent. This should be done immediately (within the next several days) to set the stage.

According to their answers, the next step can be designed accordingly.

TALDF can help with wording.

Ergun KIRLIKOVALI

TURKISH FORUM

erdalatrek

Dear David and friends,

If you were to click on the html “pressoffice” at the bottom of Sally Sahagian’s disgusting “press release” you would see the email address:

[email protected]

While Sahagian gives her email address as [email protected], it is obvious that the “press release” is an Armenian Church of Canada product.

Perhaps TALDF can seize this opportunity to deliver where it will truly count and weigh the genocide-mongers down.

Regards,

June 3, 2009

INTOLERANCE TO REASONED, SCHOLARLY DEBATE

June 3, 2009

To: Sheldon Levy, President and Vice-Chancellor, [email protected]

Cc: Kanizehn Wadia, Executive Secretary to the President, [email protected]
Erin McGinn, Director, Office of the President, [email protected]
Carrie-Ann Bissonnette, Special Assistant, Events & Special Projects, [email protected]
Alan Shepard, Provost and Vice President Academic – [email protected]
Dr. Heather Lane Vetere, Vice Provost, Students – [email protected]
Terry Gillin, Dean of sociology, [email protected]
Mustafa Koc, Professor, Sociology Department, [email protected]
Re: Intolerance at Canada’s Ryerson University to reasoned, scholarly debate

Dear President Levy:
I am responding to the apology you issued to the Armenian students for the scholarly seminar organized by the Turkish students at Ryerson University on February 18, 2009, featuring Professor Turkkaya Ataov, a researcher who authored of more than 80 books. I found your apology biased, unfair, and unscholarly. Here are my reasons and thoughts:

BIAS IN THE TERM “ARMENIAN GENOCIDE”

If one cherishes values like fairness, objectivity, truth, and honesty, then one should really use the term “Turkish-Armenian conflict”. Reducing this complex human tragedy that affected all the people of the area down to “Do you accept or deny Armenian Genocide” simply shows one’s anti-Turkish bias. The question should be re-phrased “What is your stand on the Turkish-Armenian conflict?”

Turks document it clearly that it was an inter communal warfare mostly fought by Turkish and Armenian irregulars, a civil war which is engineered, provoked, and waged by the Armenian revolutionaries, with active support from Russia, England, France, and other countries, as well as Western media and missionaries, all interested in the vast resources of the collapsing Ottoman Empire for different reasons and to varying degrees, against a backdrop of a raging world war.

Armenians, on the other hand, ignoring Armenian agitation, raids, rebellions, terrorism, treason, territorial demands, and Turkish victims killed by Armenians, claim that it was a one way genocide, a claim never tested at a court of law but mostly based on hearsay and forgeries.

GENOCIDE ALLEGATIONS IGNORE “THE SIX T’S OF THE TURKISH-ARMENIAN CONFLICT”

While some in unsuspecting public may be forgiven for taking the blatant and ceaseless Armenian propaganda at face value and believing Armenian falsifications merely because they are repeated so often, it is difficult and painful for someone like me, the son of Turkish survivors on both maternal and paternal sides, whose story is hardly ever heard due to censorship induced by Armenian pressure groups.

Those seemingly endless “War years” of 1912-1922 brought three separate but consecutive wars on Ottoman soil (The Balkans, WWI, and the Independence Wars) and wide-spread death and destruction on to all Ottoman citizens. No Turkish family was left touched, mine certainly included. Those nameless, faceless Turkish victims are killed for a second time today with politically motivated and baseless charges of Armenian genocide. Those wars were brought onto Turks, not vice-versa, fought on Turkish soil, not in England, France, or Russia, and Turks were only defending their home, not out for conquest.

ALLEGATIONS OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ARE RACIST AND DISHONEST HISTORY

They are racist because they ignore the Turkish dead: about 3 million during WWI; more than half a million of them at the hands of Armenian nationalists.

And the allegations of Armenian genocide are dishonest because they simply dismiss

THE SIX T’S OF THE TURKISH-ARMENIAN CONFLICT:

1) TUMULT (as in numerous Armenian armed uprisings, 1878-1921)

2) TERRORISM (by well-armed Armenian nationalists and militias victimizing Ottoman-Muslims, 1882-1922)

3) TREASON (Armenians joining the invading enemy armies, 1914-1921)

4) TERRITORIAL DEMANDS (where Armenians were a minority, not a majority, attempting to establish Greater Armenia, the would-be first apartheid of the 20th Century with a Christian minority ruling over a Muslim majority, 1878- present )

5) TURKISH SUFFERING AND LOSSES (i.e. those caused by the Armenian nationalists: 524,000 Muslims, mostly Turks, met their tragic end at the hands of Armenian revolutionaries during WWI, documented by the Turkish Historical Society. This figure is not to be confused with about 2.5 million Muslim dead who lost their lives due to non-Armenian causes during WWI.)

6) TERESET (temporary resettlement) triggered by the first five T’s above and amply documented as such; not to be equated to the Armenian misrepresentations as genocide.)

VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS AMOUNTS TO LYNCHING

Those who take the Armenian “allegations” of genocide at face value seem to also ignore the following:

1- Genocide is a legal, technical term precisely defined by the U.N. 1948 convention (Like all proper laws, it is not retroactive to 1915.)

2- Genocide verdict can only be given by a “competent court” after “due process” where both sides are properly represented and evidence mutually cross examined.

3- For a genocide verdict, the accusers must prove “intent” at a competent court and after due process. This could never be done by the Armenians whose evidence mostly fall into five major categories: hearsay, mis-representations, exaggerations, forgeries, and “other”.

4- Such a “competent court” was never convened in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict and a genocide verdict does not exist (save a Kangaroo court in occupied Istanbul in 1920 where partisanship, vendettas, and revenge motives left no room for due process.)

5- Genocide claim is political, not historical or factual. It reflects bias against Turks. Therefore, the term genocide must be used with the qualifier “alleged”, for scholarly objectivity and truth.

POLITICAL LYNCHING OF THE TURKS BY ARMENIANS TODAY

Recognizing Armenian claim as genocide, therefore, will deeply insult Turkish-Canadians and Turks around the globe and poison the otherwise excellent relations currently enjoyed between the Canada and Turkey. It will, no doubt, please Armenians but disappoint, insult, and outrage Turkey, one of Canada’s closest allies and a partner in NATO. Turks stood shoulder to shoulder with Canadians in Gulf War, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and more. Genocide charge, unproven and unjustified, is the worst insult that can be dished out to an entire nation and a democracy respecting human rights, not to mention a close friend, an staunch ally , and a reliable partner in a troubled part of the world.

History is not a matter of ” gut feelings, thoughts, beliefs, conviction, consensus, political resolutions, or propaganda.” History is a matter of unbiased research, honest peer review, thoughtful debate, and meticulous scholarship. Even historians, by the U.N. definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is a special task reserved for a “competent court” with its legal expertise and due process.

What we witness today amounts to lynching of the Turks by Armenians to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry. Values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, balance, honesty, and freedom of speech are stumped under the fanatic Armenian feet.

Those who claim genocide verdict today, based on the much discredited Armenian evidence, are actually engaging in “conviction and execution without due process”. Last time I checked with the dictionary, that was the definition of “lynching”.

Isn’t it about time to stop fighting the First World War after almost a century and give peace a real chance?

Perhaps an even better question is, isn’t it time to allow the historians, researchers, and scholars to take over this debate?

The capability to explore and discuss contentious issues in a rational, scholarly manner is one of the trademarks that makes a University community a stimulating and exciting place. Your apology to Armenian students, implying that the Turkish-Armenian controversy should be represented like settled history in line with untested, unproven Armenian allegations, deals a blow to academic freedom and freedom of speech, thus vibrancy of a university.

After all, what good is a university if reasoned, scholarly debate is not allowed?

Peace,

ERGUN KIRLIKOVALI

Son of Turkish Survivors from Both Maternal & Paternal Side

www.turkla.com
www.ethocide.com

***

June 3, 2009
Gordon Brown meets Holocaust survivors and condemns the British National Party

Gordon Brown got on board with the Mirror’s Hope not Hate bus yesterday, where he met Holocaust survivors and condemned the British National Party.

The Prime Minister warned: “There is no answer to our problems in parties that practise policies of prejudice or racism or anti-semitism.

“The unfortunate thing about the BNP is that this is their essence – policies of persecution and discrimination.”

The bus was at the South Bank in London as it ended a 15-day tour of the country, fighting racism and fascism and rejecting the far-right BNP in Thursday’s European and county elections.

Mr Brown met Holocaust survivors Ben Helfgott and Zigi Skipper, both 79, and Normandy veteran Kenneth Riley, 85, along with Harry Potter actor Jason Isaacs.

Ben, who was 10 when Hitler invaded his native Poland, said: “These people, the BNP, are Holocaust deniers. They don’t give anyone any respect, so they deserve only condemnation.”

Zigi, also Polish, survived the notorious Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp.

He said: “I would like to thank the Hope not Hate campaign for standing up against hatred. I believe the British will not be kidded by the BNP’s lies.”

Normandy hero Ken said. “I fought the Nazis before and I’ll fight them again. Britain’s not the place for fascists.”

Jason, 43, said: “I’m in huge admiration for what these men have lived through. The BNP are the opposite of what being British is all about.”

Turning to Ken, he added: “This man here has the medals and knows the sacrifice made during the Second World War in the name of fighting fascism. All we need to do is to raise our voices.”

By Ros Wynne-Jones 2/06/2009

Mirror

June 3, 2009
The Kurdistan Regional Government Launches Oil Exports through Turkey

The Kurdistan Regional Government Launches Oil Exports through Turkey

Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 105

June 2, 2009

By: Saban Kardas

The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) has started to export its oil to European markets, under partnerships with Turkish and other international energy companies. Following a new consensus on the distribution of revenues between the central administration in Baghdad and the KRG, oil from the Tawke and Taq Taq fields will be transported via the Kirkuk-Yumurtalik pipeline to the Turkish port of Ceyhan in the Mediterranean.

A crucial aspect of the project has been the entry of international companies into the flourishing regional economy. The KRG has tried to attract foreign investment as a means to generate wealth and consolidate its authority within northern Iraq. Having successfully attracted foreign capital, the KRG signed independent contracts for the development of the oil fields, which caused a dispute with the central Iraqi government. In May, KRG officials announced that they received Baghdad’s approval to export oil through Iraqi pipelines (www.krg.org, May 10). Although it allowed these exports, “the central government still refuses to recognize the production-sharing agreements Kurdish authorities have signed with oil firms.” This situation created uncertainty regarding the payment of foreign investors’ revenues, but the statements from KRG officials indicate that this will not become a major issue (Today’s Zaman, June 2).

A joint venture between the Turkish company Genel Enerji, a subsidiary of the Cukurova group, and the Canadian-Swiss Addax Petroleum will run the operations in the Taq Taq field in Erbil. Their joint investments are valued at over $350 million. The Norwegian DNO operates the Tawke field in Dohuk, where the Genel Elektrik also holds a 25 percent stake (Hurriyet Daily News, June 2). The investors designate Taq Taq as “a potentially world class oil field” (www.addaxpetroleum.com). KRG sources also claim that the oil from this region is high quality and expect the new production to “improve on the overall quality of the present Kirkuk oil mix.” Oil from the Tawke field will be directly transferred to the Kirkuk-Yumurtalik through an auxiliary pipeline. As a temporary measure, the crude from the Taq Taq will first be transported by road to the existing local pipeline networks – and from there it will connect to the Kirkuk-Yumurtalik export pipeline (www.krg.org, May 8).

Iraq’s State Oil Marketing Company (SOMO) will market the exported oil from both fields and the revenues will be deposited in the federal account. Under the Taq Taq deal, Baghdad will receive 88 percent of the revenues, 17 percent of which will go to the KRG. Foreign investors will receive a 12 percent share. The Tawke deal reportedly has similar stipulations (www.krg.org, May 8; www.alarabiya.net, June 1).

Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, KRG President Masoud Barzani, KRG Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani, as well as other dignitaries from the KRG and representatives of the investors participated in a ceremony held in Erbil to celebrate the export deal. Talabani described this development as a “historic step” and contended that it signified how the Iraqis can work together for the prosperity of the country. In a move to allay concerns over the legality of the contracts, Talabani said “these contracts are legal, constitutional and legitimate and they are in the interests of the Iraqi people” (www.alarabiya.net, June 1).

Earlier, one KRG representative, Halid Salih, also emphasized that they were acting within the boundaries set by the Iraqi constitution. He noted that they entered into agreements with foreign companies according to the constitution, which granted greater autonomy to regional governments to explore oil following its revisions in 2005 (Cihan Haber Ajansi, June 1).

Echoing similar sentiments, Nechirvan Barzani described this project as a gift of the KRG to the Iraqi people. He emphasized the KRG’s respect for the central administration, but stressed how hard they worked to secure a fair share of the region’s revenues. Barzani explained that:

“Fortunately, we possess abundant natural resources … We must use these resources … for the benefit of all the people of Iraq… We signed contracts with international oil companies in order to bring capital, technology, know-how and experience to our region and to the entire country… We are proud to contribute to Iraq’s increased production and revenues. In reality, revenue-sharing will bind us together more than any political slogan” (www.krg.org, June 1).

Oil exports will begin at an initial rate of around 100,000 barrels per day. 60,000 barrels will be pumped from the Tawke field, while the remaining 40,000 of the light crude will come from the Taq Taq field. Havrami said the crude exports from both fields are expected to reach 250,000 barrels per day within one year, 450,000 barrels per day by the end of 2010 and 1 million barrels per day by 2013. According to current price estimates, within four years, the annual revenues from exports might reach $20 billion (www.tempo24.com.tr, June 2).

This agreement highlights the prospect for mutually beneficial economic cooperation, if internal political disagreements are set aside. Since the country urgently needs revenues to recover from the effects of a devastating war, the wealth brought by the oil exports might offer further incentives for political reconciliation, and help heal the feud between the KRG and the central administration. Nonetheless, it remains unclear how other political actors within the Iraqi political scene will react. Other than President Talabani, himself a Kurd, non-Kurdish members of the Shiite Arab dominated Iraqi central government did not attend the ceremony, which might indicate some enduring disagreement. Similarly, Iraq’s Oil Minister Hussein al-Shahristani also reportedly questioned the legality of the KRG’s deal.

In any case, such joint projects have the potential to boost not only ties between the KRG and the central administration, but also Ankara’s relations with both the KRG and Baghdad. Economic collaboration serves as a major driving force to sustain the existing security cooperation partnership within the region (EDM, April 13).

https://jamestown.org/program/the-kurdistan-regional-government-launches-oil-exports-through-turkey/

June 3, 2009
Germany Gives Up on Anti-Turkey Stance

Conservative Party in Germany Gives Up on Anti-Turkey Stance

By JUDY DEMPSEY

Published: June 1, 2009

BERLIN — As citizens across Europe prepare to vote this week for a new European Parliament, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservative bloc has abandoned its attempt to create a wedge issue out of Turkey’s potential entry into the European Union.

The change in approach is an acknowledgement by conservatives that they have more to gain by appealing to Germany’s 690,000 Turkish voters than by alienating them with blunt talk about the political and cultural differences separating Turkey and the rest of the E.U.

The conservatives view the parliamentary balloting, which starts on Thursday, as a barometer for the federal elections in September and realize that they need every vote they can get if Mrs. Merkel is to be re-elected. Though Mrs. Merkel spoke out against Turkey’s E.U. ambitions as recently as last month, the bloc has since refrained from making Turkey’s entry, or E.U. enlargement in general, a major issue in the campaign.

“The time is over for a Christian Democratic party in Germany to adopt an anti-Turkey campaign,” said Gerhard Hirscher, an analyst at the Hanns Seidel Foundation, which is affiliated with the Christian Social Union, the sister party of Mrs. Merkel’s Christian Democrats. “The foreign policy experts in the party have made it clear they do not support the idea of using the European Parliament elections to campaign against Turkey joining the E.U. Turkey is an important country. More importantly, every vote matters in September.”

Turks who have acquired German citizenship are eligible to vote for the European Parliament and in the federal elections.

The softening stance on Turkey in Germany differs from that of several of its European neighbors. In France, Turkey-bashing has become fashionable during campaigning for the European Parliament and starts at the top with President Nicolas Sarkozy, an outspoken opponent of Turkey’s entry to the E.U. In the Netherlands, the director Geert Wilders, whose film “Fitna” features Muslims insulting Islam and the Koran, is using his opposition to Islam to try to get elected to the European Parliament.

The Freedom Party of Austria has a slogan that states, “No to Turkey.” In Bulgaria, which joined the E.U. in January 2007, the nationalist party National Union Attack is using anti-Turkish slogans in its campaign.

Likewise, Mrs. Merkel’s conservative bloc once believed that it could gain political advantage by tapping into a growing disillusionment with enlargement, while also pointing out the costs and difficulty of incorporating a large Muslim country into a mostly Christian grouping. But that stance appears to have given way to political reality. According to the first poll conducted among Germany’s Turks, more than 55 percent of eligible Turkish voters would opt for the Social Democrats if elections were held now, with 23 percent saying that they would vote for the Green Party and only 10 percent selecting Mrs. Merkel’s Christian Democrats and the Christian Social Union.

“The majority of German Turks, who by their fundamental positions are religious and conservative, during elections reward the Social Democrats and the Greens because of their integration policies,” said Joachim Schulte, director of Data 4U, which carried out the survey three months ago.

Though the need for votes may have altered the campaign strategy, it does not seem to have essentially altered Mrs. Merkel’s attitudes toward Turkey. She has consistently advocated a “privileged partnership” for Turkey — meaning that it would be granted substantial benefits but barred from membership, thus denying Turkey the right to vote on E.U. matters. But Mrs. Merkel has never tried to stop E.U. negotiations with Turkey, which opened in 2005.

Her party’s election manifesto for the European Parliament elections specifically mentions that when it comes to meeting the E.U. criteria for membership — including equality between men and women, protection of minorities and freedom of religion — Turkey has “fulfilled” none of these conditions.

“A privileged partnership and not full membership for Turkey in the E.U. is the right solution,” the manifesto states.

Source:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/world/europe/02iht-germany.html?ref=world

June 2, 2009
Poor Richard’s Report

Poor Richard’s Report

Over 300,000 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 been given the ability to evaluate, study, and interpret world and national events and their influence on the future of the financial markets. This gift allows me to meet the needs of individual and institution clients.

AS I SEE IT

O.K. Here is some straight talk about the economy and the stock market. The economy is bottoming out. Notice I said bottoming, not rebounding. Think of it this way: you own a swimming pool that has sprung a pretty good leak. By the time you have stopped the leak you have lost 5% of your water. The problem is you have been experiencing a dry spell and your reservoir (credit) is almost empty. You now have just a glass full of water to refill your pool, just one cup at a time, slowly.
Now, has our Congress come to the rescue just in time? They have redefined the credit card industry, which makes it a little harder for the companies to gouge us. They left the interest rates the same. Before 1974 it was called USURY. That was and should be a very bad word. Who do they think they are conning? We are not that dumb. Both parties are on the take. They use a once honored term- Lobbyist. Today that stands for bribery. Everyone in Washington feels they can just keep on printing money. If we were on some form of a gold standard, where excessive debt meant a weaker dollar and less trade, they would think twice about padding their own boudoir.
I am not a true economist and I must rely on sources that I know are competent. I have studied and learned from them for over 48 years.
One thing is very clear. When a US Treasury bill has a negative yield; we are in deep trouble. The last time that happened was 1932. This means big money is scared and they are paying the government to hold on to their money. Today, May 29, 2009 the 2 year Treasury note is yielding 0.97%. Buying bonds today is an instant loss.
When most bonds were issued, it was when business was booming and the revenues at that time supported the intended interest rate. Now with business at a snails pace the debt coverage of these bonds is in serious jeopardy. Debt coverage means how many times the liquid assets can cover the bond interest payments. The greater the coverage on the bond interest payments – the higher the rating. If a bond cannot pay it’s interest payment then the whole company is in default and they have to find some way to pay the bondholders. They have first crack at a corporation’s assets. What is left goes to the preferred shareholders and common stock holders get the crumbs. So buying a bond fund or any instrument that holds many bonds should be avoided. Even the managers are not sure which bond will go down next. You should only buy bonds, if you must, as individual issues. This makes insurance companies very suspect.
General Motor’s bondholders are getting a royal shafting by being made to accept common stock or “funny money”. This is, in theory, to protect the pension funds, which still own the preferred and common stock. Balderdash! I believe this will end up in the Supreme Court of the United States.
Don’t get me wrong; buying bonds at the appropriate time can reward an investor handsomely. Timing is everything.
Now here is the really bad part. Don’t fret because at the end of this letter I have the answer for you. The stock market has not bottomed in my opinion. In March I called the bottom, and we have had a fantastic rally, but now I have second thoughts. I know we will test the lows by October of this year. Whether they hold, nobody knows. One can only guess. Right now my guess is no.
Speculators and the media believe naively that we are ready to resume a rain-delayed ball game. Too bad we can’t refund our tickets.
The problem is that the mechanic’s of the market place have not been corrected.
You can see the speculators still playing the market – especially the big capitalization stocks – and are swimming in shark-infested waters. These sharks have no regard for ethics or laws or anyone’s skin but their own. At the present time the media is impressed by wealth, but not how it was earned. Financial morals are lower than the bottom of the ocean.
What we have to do is trash the conservatives and liberals at the same time and elect middle of the roaders that work with both sides of the isles. We need some hard nose politicians that are not afraid to speak plainly and openly. The problems of today are here because we had weak-kneed bureaucrats that were either paid off or lacked the intestinal fortitude to right a wrong. When you are around money, unless the laws are strictly enforced, slimy eels mess up your boat badly.
We now need global enforcement so that citizens of countries that do not comply are blackballed. The US was once known as the safest haven with the toughest laws in the whole wide world. Sadly, the keepers of the faith retired.
So until we have a global regulatory agency that will protect investors, the stock markets for the most part are a crapshoot, or like picking a single number on a roulette wheel.
Buying a bond is going to be an instant loss at best. We have to borrow trillions of dollars to finance this socialist experiment. Who wants to borrow the first trillion? China and Brazil want to trade in their own currency. When a central banker sells a government security he receives dollars. They then sell the dollar to pay for the gold. That is why you see gold go up when the dollar goes down.
The whole world is in debt.
My big fear is that in January Obama will try to get rid of Bernanke who is Chairman of the Federal Reserve. That is like changing horses in mid stream to borrow a quote from yesteryear. Right now the whole world is listening to him. He has made honest mistakes and corrected them quickly. In the past when a stock analyst made a mistake I would pay careful attention to him, because I knew he was trying very hard to make up for the previous mistake and had learned from his error. Then there were some that could turn a load of manure into gold bars. Caveat Emptor.
In my last letter I recommended buying Spider Gold Trust (NYSE GLD $96.16) and today I am adding Central Fund of Canada (NYSE CEF $12.56) which hold gold and silver bars in one of Canada’s largest bank vaults.
My reasoning is this: they keep increasing their benefits while decreasing ours and refuse to really fix the inequities. By going back on some form of the gold system this puts pressure on them to perform properly. If they spend too much it will weaken the dollar and send them out of office quicker than you can blink.

In 1950 we held 68.2% of the worlds’ gold at Fort Knox. Today it is less than 28%. The whole world is awash in debt and dollars and sooner or later something has to give. To protect yourself, your family, and your job or business you should consider buying some gold stocks that own gold.
If countries decide to go back on some form of the gold standard the price could increase two to tens times the current price or more. If the Government tries to confiscate it like they did in 1932 they went from $21 to $35. That is a pretty good percentage increase- so I would not worry about that now.
Remember when things get really bad, they can only get better.
Those needing income should look at preferred stock of sound companies selling below their call price. The sharks can not mess around with these with ease. Many are qualified preferred’s which means 85% is tax free. I prefer AMERCO $2.125 preferred list on the NYSE. The Symbol is AO-A. They own U-Haul Trailer Company. That is also traded on NASDAQ- UHAL-$36.85. A good way to keep track of the preferred is to watch for any sudden shift in UHAL.
There are also lots of values north of our borders in Canada. The Canadians did not monkey around with their banking system so many of their companies are in fairly stable condition versus the United States.
A word of caution; I was having my Saturday morning breakfast at the Woodstock Country Store when I met this gentleman who told me this amazing tale. In his business he has to buy nickel, about 400 pounds per year. This year he placed his order and found out the price had dropped 50%. I found out later that China had stopped buying.
This example is just another reason why we should be moving to some form of a gold standard. It puts a ball and chain on our politicians, who cannot get a real job, and gives a solid standard of living for us and for our grandchildren.
Buy some gold as a protection and a hedge. If you have any problems you can contact me personally at the numbers listed below.
Thank you and Cheerio!!!

Addendum

Chairman Bernanke’s plan if we ever had a depression again was to go into a helicopter and spread dollar bills all over the country in every town, village and farm. This is what he wrote his thesis on while getting his doctorate at M.I.T.
Nothing goes as planned. He has his depression, and he has the chance to implement his ideas, but there is always a catch. An election came and a populace president and his party were swept into office.
Now everyone wants on the ‘gravy train’, which is actually more like a giant lemming lumbering towards the seaside cliff. States are now knocking on the door like hobos of the past for a needed handout. Except this time there will be no thank you, instead they will simply rush to get in line again for more.
The mighty dollar is ready to be downgraded to compete with the Chinese Yuan and the Mexican Peso and the Italian Lira. Interest rates will catapult over night as computers change the price of our bonds in the twinkling of an eye.
The idea of the good Doctor Bernanke was to distribute funds into private hands that would create jobs where needed, which is certainly not in Washington D.C. Washington should be responsible for creating rules and umpires to make sure the game is played honestly.
The lesson we learned from the 1930’s was that our banks and credit system had to be sacrosanct. Once those standards were lowered the blood sucking vampires landed in Washington DC. They are called Lobbyists. What is your interest rate?

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.

June 2, 2009