Europe, Refugees and Racism

Chomsky:

"I always felt Europe was more racist"

"EU opposition to Turkish accession is 'racist,' "

"If only the people of the United States knew what their government is doing and the crimes it has committed, one might think, they would rise up and change it. But, in fact, even if they were to read all the books by Noam Chomsky and all the material released by WikiLeaks, they could still vote the same politicians back in power and, ultimately, reproduce the same society. Information alone is not enough 

(Hardt and Negri, Declaration, 2012: 36).

Interview with Noam Chomsky on Racism in US and Europe by Mine Gencel Bek

US Media Coverage

MGB: [My husband and I] have been in the US more than a year and able to follow the media more closely. We are surprised that we hardly hear about Turkey on the news. When there is a big protest or a catastrophe, yes, we hear—but other than that, nothing. Turkey is not important for the US media.

NC: Not just Turkey. Nothing is reported here. For a couple of years, I went through the New York Times index just to see who was covered. The United States, of course, a huge amount on Israel. Then Latin America and Asia.

MGB: It is interesting that TV correspondents these days ask, “Where is Turkey?” They say, “We were supporting them for a long time through financial aid and so on. Now [the war against ISIS] is their war, and this is not our war. They should be [fighting], not us.”

NC: It is typical of reporting Turkey, only so far as it relates to US policies. For example, in the 1990s, when there were horrible atrocities being carried out in southeastern Turkey—thousands of villages were destroyed, people became refugees—all the arms were coming from the US. The flow of arms increased. There was no reporting. The New York Times has a bureau in Ankara and quite a good correspondent there. Nothing appeared about Turkish human-rights violations. In 2003, something extremely interesting happened. The US wanted Turkey to participate in the invasion of Iraq, and the Turkish refused. The government did not pay attention to the US, but simply responded to the population: 95% of the population was opposed. Turkey were bitterly attacked here. And at that point the press started to point to Turkish human-rights violations because Turkey did not follow US orders. That is the way it works. That is reporting Turkey, because it is not cooperating with the US coalition now.

MGB: Turkey accepted cooperating though this time to support the coalition.

NC: Yes, but they are not enthusiastic, so they get reported…

MGB: Media and freedom of speech are in a very bad shape now in Turkey.

NC: I first went to Turkey in 1999 to attend a court trial. A publisher published a book of mine. The publisher had been brought to the court. I went to visit the trial, and I insisted on being a co-defender in the trial. There was a lot of publicity on national television. I was interested to see how journalists wanted me to talk about Turkish atrocities. They asked things they could not report because it was the crime but wanted me to talk about on national television. So it was quite open.

MGB: We were also more optimistic for a while. There was an opening.

NC: There were lots of improvements—and then they went back. I think the reason for this reversion is this: the [European Union] made it very clear that no matter what Turkey does, they are not going to accept Turkey as a member. They keep claiming human rights. But every time Turkey passed some tests, nothing happened. The reason is that they do not want Turkey in the Union.


Forms of Race Discrimination in the US

MGB: With the Muslim population, of course…Here, when we watch the media, there is more qualitative reporting in the mainstream as well. Not on Fox TV, but in other mainstream media. But when we watched the Ferguson events after Michael Brown was killed by the police, there were racist connotations in the media. New York Times article claimed that he Brown was no angel by emphasizing that he was using drugs, had no success at school, and so on. Racism continues here. I personally think that if there was were no organized anti-racist power, the organization and solidarity among them, and protests, then things could be even worse. Racist remarks would continue to be made more openly.

NC: When you look at the New York Times, they do report racism in the South, but not much racism in the North, which is more settled. Take Boston. Take a look at the subway system in Boston. There is the subway here, the Red Line. Notice the route it follows: It goes to the edge of Cambridge. Why does it not go beyond to the western suburbs? Thirty years ago, right in the middle of the talk on racism and segregation, there was a proposal to extend the Red Line to the western suburbs, Arlington, and Lexington. They refused. Actually, I live there in Lexington. There are progressive, liberal, professional, and academic towns. They refused the extension, even though it would have been an enormous saving. It would have taken me 10 minutes to get to work instead of fighting traffic jams. Same for everyone else there. But they would not allow the subway to come because if they did, black kids from downtown Boston could get on the subway and walk around Lexington Center.

MGB: But what do people in Lexington think about it?  If the people there are more progressive, why did they not support that?

NC: They do not talk about it. They think that it is just not polite to talk about it. That kind of racism does not get discussed. There is the racism of other people, not us. It is the same with school busing. Those kinds of things are not reported.

MGB: The food [in the US] is more industrial and unhealthy. Fresh food is expensive. You see, for example in fast-food places, that the customers are mostly people of color who cannot afford more expensive and refined foods. That is also a big issue.

NC: There is not a big black community in Boston. But if you go to Philadelphia, for example, there are miles and miles of places with black communities. There is no supermarket. The supermarkets are all in white areas. Blacks have to buy food from small stores, which have much higher prices. To go to supermarkets, you have to drive. Here, too. Supermarkets are almost all out of the city. These are forms of discrimination. Most severe is the drug war, which is completely racist—it was designed to be a racist war. It targets black males. Blacks do not use drug more than whites do, but blacks are the ones who are arrested. It starts from police practices all the way to procedures. That is why we have a huge black population in jail. The drug war was started in the 1980s. It is essentially criminalizing black life. After the Civil War, African Americans theoretically had rights. But when a black man was standing in a corner, he could be arrested if somebody said he looked at a white woman. He could be arrested with “attempting to rape”. He could not get out of jail. Even though it was a $10 fine, he could not pay. It ended up meaning a huge black male population in jail. Then they became a slave labor force. Literally. The American Industrial Revolution in the late 19th century was heavily based on slave labor in the prisons. For the capitalist owners, that is much better than slavery. If the state maintains [prisons], you get [the labor for] free. Lots of industry developed with slave labor, black labor, in prison. That went on up until the Second World War. Then couple of decades, in the 1950s and 1960s, of high growth, when a black man gets a decent job, unionized, could buy a house, kids could get to college. By the 1970s, that ended. We moved to a neo-liberal period. The unions were destroyed. Sharp cutbacks. Minimum-wage benefits declined, and pretty soon, we had drug war, which reinstated what happened in the 19th century. Black males went back to jail. Hispanics, too, but primarily black males. They work but do not get paid, of course. This is 500 years of American history. The first slaves came here to Massachusetts 500 years ago.

MGB: In the next decades, the population statistics show that people of color will be the majority in the US. Would it make a difference?

NC: No. Whites are becoming a minority. Hispanic population is growing fast. Then the Asian population and the black population. Part of the reason for the extremely reactionary character of the South and Southwest is that people there recognize they are becoming a minority. They say so: “It is not our country anymore. It is not White, English, Anglo Saxon.” Germany is the same. Did you read what Merkel said about the Turks?


Racism of Europe

NC: They say, “Look, they refused to have blue eyes. They cannot be assimilated.” [Racism] is even worse in Europe than here.

MGB: We also felt the same, compared to our experience in Europe.

NC: I am not surprised. Europe is unbelievable. The most oppressed people in Europe are Romans. Discrimination against them is horrible. The people are Holocaust victims. They were treated the same as Jews, literally by Hitler. France was expelling them to Hungary and Romania, where they were going to be killed. When you do to Jews, [the media?] explodes. But when you do to Romans, no one writes about it. It is the same with Islam in France. It is shocking. In the suburbs, where the North African population lives, the racism they face is astonishing. I always felt that Europe is more racist than the US. It is more visible in the US because of the legacy of slavery, but in attitudes, Europe is just horrible. It was not that visible in Europe because of a more homogenous community. Almost everybody was almost the same. As soon as immigrants come in, it becomes very clear. What happened in Denmark was striking. Remember in Denmark.

MGB: Cartoons against Muhammed.

NC: And there was a big uprising. The history is interesting. There is about 7% Muslims in Denmark. That is a pure white Nordic community with 7% Muslims. The Ministry of Culture made a speech. Shortly after that, the newspaper published this cartoon mocking Muhammed. That had a reaction.

MGB: Was it like a provocation?

NC: Two years before, that same newspaper received cartoons mocking Jesus. They refused to publish it. That is the history. That is Islamophobia. But the way [the issue] was represented here was that Muslims are terrible, do not allow freedom of speech. The actual story is pretty much different. These days, it is not getting better, either.

MGB: What do you think about the use of digital tools by social movements?  We have at least witnessed Edward Snowden in the US. In Turkey, the Prime Minister’s corruption was at least revealed on the web. Do you have hope [for the Digital Age]?

NC: It is double-edged. It offers these opportunities, but also offers opportunities for white racists…What is unfortunate is that people are drawn to positions very much like their own. Say, the New York Times. Yes, there is a lot of criticism. Nevertheless, when you read the New York Times, at least you get some range of opinion. When you go to the Internet, what people do is to go to exactly these places where their opinions are expressed. So if you are on the left, you go to DemocracyNow; if you are on the right, you go to Fox News. You just never hear other opinions. People are getting restricted to their own point of view, which gets reinforced because that is what you hear.

MGB: Pew Research Center revealed that there is a kind of spiral of silence about Snowden on social media. He is not discussed much. When he is, it is in places to get approved. No one wants to be outside the spiral.

NC: Interesting. Here, I did some experiments and asked what kids in the last generation see. How do they react? Most of them do not seem to care very much.


Mine Gencel Bek - link
Teaches at the Department of Journalism, Faculty of Communication, Ankara University, Turkey. 

Noam Chomsky is Institute Professor in the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston. A member of the American Academy of Science, he has published widely in both linguistics and current affairs. His books include At War with Asia, Towards a New Cold War, Fateful Triangle: The U. S., Israel and the Palestinians, Necessary Illusions, Hegemony or Survival, Deterring Democracy, Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy and Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media.

other link

Noam Chomsky: 

"Avrupa ırkçıdır, Türklerle aynı sokakta yürümek istemez; ABD, Türkiye'de demokrasi istemiyor!"

link:

Europe is crying only for, approximate, 500.000 refugees :)

“I think most people feel that we cannot maintain a system where perhaps 190,000 people will arrive every year – in the long run, our system will collapse. And that welcome is not going to receive popular support,” said Wallstrom, Sweden - link

"Migrant workers' house in Germany destroyed in fire. Five refugee shelters have been set alight in the German state in the last few weeks following the arrival of thousands of refugees fleeing war and poverty in the Middle East and Africa." 
20.10.2015-link


Turkey and Jordan to EU: Our Refugee Problem Is Bigger Than Yours...
“Until now, the management of these refugees has been only on the shoulder of neighboring countries,” 
link



Armed masked men around the Greek islands have been targeting migrant boats and turning them back, sometimes throwing their engines away, according to a damning HRW report. This follows witness claims of Greek border guards refusing asylum seekers entry. The report bases its findings on nine witness testimonies detailing cases of masked, often armed, assailants intercepting boats off the Aegean Sea coast, which are usually headed from neighboring Turkey carrying refugees from the Syrian war. The most recent case allegedly took place on October 7 and 9, when the attackers allegedly disabled the engines of several boats and even punctured holes in their inflatable hulls. Some of the boats were towed back into Turkish waters.
23.Oct.2015 - link


Europeans are Hypocritical, Crocodile tears for the dead children 
on the shores of the Aegean.

"Avrupa Komisyonu, Yunanistan ve İtalya başta olmak üzere göçmenlerin geçiş noktasında bulunan ülkelere 

2.4 milyar euro yardım yapacak

Avrupa Komisyonu yüksek sayıda göçmenle mücadele etmekte zorlanan Yunanistan ve İtalya da dahil olmak üzere 

bazı ülkelere krizle başa çıkabilmesi için altı yıl boyunca toplam 2.4 milyar euro yardımda bulunma kararı aldı.

Yardımın en büyük kısmını alacak İtalya'ya 560 milyon euro, Yunanistan'a ise 473 milyon euro verilecek."

10 Ağustos 2015 basın

Sorunu yaşayan sadece göçmenlerde de değil,
sömürgecilerin yarattığı terör yüzünden o bölgede 
yaşamak zorunda olanlarda zor durumda.

Pardon ama, bu ülkelerin mülteci sayısı nedir?

İkiyüzlü Irkçılar!!!

Göçmenler : Türkiye-Avrupa

Refugees : Turkiye-Europe

___________________

GÖÇMENLER TÜRKİYE AVRUPA - REFUGEES TURKEY EUROPE

"Irak birliklerinin Körfez Savaşı'ndan hemen sonra kuzeye yönelik bazı operasyonlarından kaçan 450.000 kişi türkiye'ye sığındı. Bu Türkiye açısından büyük ekonomik ve insani sorunlara yo laçtı. Daha önce de Halepçe saldırıları sırasında binlerce Iraklı Türkiye'ye sığınmıştı. Türkiye bütün bu mültecilerin güvenliğinin ve barındırılmasının sorumluluğunu üstlendi. Bunların büyük çoğunluğu Kürt asıllıydı.

O tarihlerde Batı dünyasında bölgedeki Kürtlerin sorunlarına büyük ilgi gösteriliyordu. Siyasi şahsiyetler bu konuda sık sık beyanatta bulunuyor, bölgedeki devletlerin neyi nasıl yapmaları gerektiği konusunda akıl veriyorlardı. Bu nedenle bu büyük göç harekatının yaralarının sarılması için bu ülkelerin aynı duyarlılığı göstermeleri beklenirdi. Nitekim bazı Batılı ülkelerin dışişleri bakanları ve diğer üst düzey yetkilileri kalabalık bir gazeteci ordusuyla Türkiye'nin güneydoğusunda bu miltecilerin barındırıldıkları kampları gezdiler, nakliye uçaklarıyla bazı insani yardım malzemelerini bölgeye ulaştırdılar.

Ama bu, Türkiye'nin üzerindeki yükün sadece küçük bir bölümünün kaldırılmasına yetti. Türkiye bu göçmenlerin ihtiyaçlarının çoğunu, bu arada sağlık ve eğitim gereksinmlerini kendi bütçesinden karşıladı. Bu iş için 200 milyon dolardan fazla para harcandı.

Göçmenlerin büyük bir bölümü Batı ülkelerine yerleşmek için başvuruda bulundular. Türkiye bu talepleri ilgili ülkelere iletti. Ne yazık ki, gelen cevaplar pek iç açıcı değildi.

Bu insanlarla uzakta oldukları sürece ilgilenen, merhamet gösteren, Türkiye dahil bölge ülkelerini zaman zaman haksız ölçülere varacak biçimde eleştiren bu ülkeler, mesele göçmen almaya gelince pek de cömert olmadıklarını gösterdiler. Batılı ülkelerin tümünün kabul etmeye hazır oldukları göçmen sayısı 1.000'i geçmedi. Onları da iyi eğitilmiş, doktorluk, mühendislik gibi alanlarda diploma sahibi olanlar arasından seçeceklerdi. Gerisi Türkiye'ye kalacaktı.

Onur Öymen

Silahsız Savaş; Bir Mücadele Sanatı Olarak Diplomasi

kitabından

// Tanıdık geliyor mu?

// O 450bin oldu sana 1,5milyon ve de bölücü!

// Suriyeli göçmenlerin 50 yıl sonra ne gibi talepleri olabilir acaba diye düşünüyor musun peki?

Brüksel'de önceki gece yarısına kadar süren AB zirvesinde, Suriyeli mültecilerin masrafı için AKP hükümetinin istediği o zavallı miktar, yani 3 milyar eurocuk hemen onaylandı. Ancak hala anlaşma sağlanamayan iki nokta ise şu:

Ankara ayrıca Türklere vize şartlarının bir an önce gevşetilmesini istiyor ( seçim yatırımı). AB ise bunun için, önce Türkiye`nin, Avrupa`ya sığınacak mülteciler için hemen geri gönderilecekleri ülke statüsünde olmayı kabul etmesinde dayatıyor. Mültecileri, geldikleri ülkeye gönderme politikası Avrupa`da yaklaşık 25 yıl önce başlatılmış, ama uygulamaya konulamamıştı. Kimbilir belki Ankara bu talebi kabul eden ilk baskent olacak! 

Merkel önceki gece konuşmasında, Avrupa`ya geçiş ülkesi olan Türkiye`nin büyük mülteci sorunu yaşadığını ve şimdiye kadar 7 milyarı aşkın masraf ettiğini, dolayısıyla AB`nin bu sorunun yükünü Ankara ile paylaşması gerektiğini söyleyerek 3 milyar vermenin uygun olacağını savundu. "Çünkü" dedi Merkel hanım : " Türkiye olmadan biz mülteci sorununu çözemeyiz."

Bütün bunlar olurken, mültecilere karşı yürüyüşler başlayan Hollanda`da dün, Maliye Bakanı Jeroen Dijsselbloem, 40 bin mültecinin masrafını 1 milyar euro olarak hesaplıyor ve Suriyeli mülteci dalgasına dur diyordu! 

Hollanda`da da mülteciler topluca kamplara konuyor ve ufak tefek yardımlarla yaşıyorlar sefalet içinde! Bakanın hesabı doğruysa, yani 40 bin multecinin 1 Milyar Euro masrafı oluyorsa, o zaman Türkiye`deki 2,5 milyar Suriyeli mülteci için AB`nin EN AZ 60 MİLYAR EURO KATKIDA BULUNMASI GEREKİR!!!

3 milyar vererek `Yükü paylaşacakmış` Merkel hanım! Sevsinler! Ne kadar da yardımsever ve bonkörler! AKP hükümeti ise hangi hakla ve ne amaçla 3 milyarcığa teslim oluyor?

AB, Batı`nın yarattığı mülteci sorununu, yani yurtlarından ettiği o zavallı insanların sorununu, 3 milyar eurocuğa kapatmak istiyor!

DÜNYANIN EN MERHAMETSİZ İNSAN SATIŞI TÜCCARI BATI VE AVRUPADIR.

Ali Develioğlu,ulusal kanal

Onur Öymen, Almanya Başbakanı Angela Merkel’in Türkiye ziyaretindeki gündemini eleştirdi. Öymen, “Bize fazla yük olmayın, parayla sizi tatmin edelim. Bizim topraklarımıza fazla insanlar gelmesin’ diyorlar. Merkel’e, üzerimizdeki yükün yarısını Avrupa paylaşsın’ denmeliydi” dedi. Öymen, Merkel’in, PKK’yı Kürtlerin temsilcisi olarak gördüğünü de söyledi.

Merkel’in para teklifi gurur verici değil!

Almanya Başbakanı’nın, Erdoğan ve Davutoğlu ile görüşmesini değerlendiren Emekli Büyükelçi Onur Öymen “Merkel mültecileri Türkiye’ye satıyor” yorumu yaptı.

Almanya Başbakanı Angela Merkel, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan ve Başbakan Ahmet Davutoğlu’nu ziyaret ederek, Türkiye’ye mülteciler konusunda maddi yardım yapmak istediğini söyledi. Merkel’in tavrını sert sözlerle eleştiren Emekli Büyükelçi Onur Öymen, para karşılığında Almanların istediği dış politikanın aşılandığını söyledi. Öymen, “Buna ‘check’ diplomasisi diyorlar. Yani ’Biz size belirli bir para verelim ve bunun karşılığında bizim istediğimiz politikaları takip edin. Bize fazla yük olmayın parayla sizi tatmin edelim. Bizim topraklarımıza fazla insanlar gelmesin.’Bunlar Türkiye hesabına göre çok gurur verici bir tablo değildir. Söylenecek cevap şudur. Biz sizin paranızın peşinde değiliz. Önemli olan bu yükü paylaşmaktır. Bize eğer katkıda bulunmak istiyorsanız, üzerimizdeki bu yükün yarısını Avrupa ülkeleri arasında paylaşsınlar. Avrupa 1 milyon mülteciyi alamayacak durumda mıdır? Ortak bir politika ile çözelim ki mülteci sorunu kendiliğinden halledilsin” dedi.

Kavgalı değiliz ki!

Çatışmaların durması halinde insanların evlerine geri döneceklerini dile getiren Öymen, silah zoruyla Esad’ı devirme politikası yerine, “Gelin siyasi bir çözüm arayalım denmesi gerekirken, bize para verecekler diye büyük bir sevinç içindeyiz” diye konuştu. Merkel’in Başbakan Davutoğlu’na söylediği, “Türkiye, Kürtlerle barışmalıdır” söylemlerini anımsatan Öymen, sözlerine şöyle sürdürdü: “Biz Kürtlerle kavgalı değiliz ki barışalım. Ama teröre o kadar çok tolerans gösterdiniz ki siz teröristleri Kürtlerin temsilcisi gibi gördünüz. Bu teröristler 40 bin kişiyi öldürdü. 40 bin kişiyi öldüren bir terör örgütünü Kürtlerin meşruiyet çizgisi mi sayıyorsunuz. Almanya’da uzun yıllar Kürtleri destekleyen sivil toplum örgütleri oldu. Alman hükümeti de 1993’e kadar beklediğimiz kararı göstermedi. Ancak ne zaman bir Türk vatandaşını Kürtler kahvede yaktılar, ondan sonra saklamak zorunda kaldılar. Hiçbir PKK militanını Türkiye’ye iade etmediler. Almanlara bu konuda çok söylenecek söz var.”

PKK’yı palazlandırdılar

Almanlarla birçok konuda anlaşılmasına rağmen bu konuda anlaşma sağlanamadığını anlatan Öymen, “Biz dedik ki ‘PKK Almanya’ya adam kaçırıyor.’ Bunu bir türlü anlatamadık. PKK’nın palazlanmasında Avrupa ve Almanların büyük katkısı oldu. Terör örgütünün öldürdüğü 40 bin insanın büyük çoğunluğu Kürt’tür. Bir şey söyleyecekseniz terör örgütü PKK’ya diyeceksiniz. Merkel’den silahları kayıtsız şartsız bırakın çağrısı geldi mi? Bunu söylemekten hep kaçındılar. Avrupa’nın fikrine göre, ‘PKK’nın verdiği mücadeleyi Türkiye taviz vererek durdurmalı, bu taviz de PKK’nın talepleri doğrultusunda olmalı’. Bu talepler de Almanya’nın senelerdir takip ettiği politikalardan da farklı değildir” şeklinde konuştu.

yeniçağ,20.1.2015

THE TRUTH ABOUT EUROPE'S MIGRANT CRISIS:

EUROPE and USA CREATED THE CHAOS IN MIGRANTS HOMELAND 

SO EUROPE MUST ACCEPT THE CONSEQUENCES !

Just as tellingly, the UK has welcomed just 187 Syrians through legal mechanisms at the last count. 

Turkey has around 2.6 million.

Turkey has risen to 1st in the rankings of refugee hosting countries, having been 59th just three years ago, because of the number of Syrian refugees entering the country. There are now 1.59 million refugees in Turkey. 

During 2014 there were 1 million Syrian refugees newly registered in Turkey.

refugeescouncil:pdf

Hungarian Camerawoman Apologizes for Kicking, Tripping Refugees!!! news 

Macaristan polisinin sınırdaki mültecilere gaz bombası ve coplarla müdahale etmesine 

BM Genel Sekreteri Ban Ki-moon'dan tepki geldi.

 haber linki

It’s not about that Europe didn’t accept them or embrace them as refugees, it’s about not dealing with the cause. If you are worried about them, stop supporting terrorists. That’s what we think regarding the crisis. 

This is the core of the whole issue of refugees. 

Assad İnterview

NEWS:15.09.2015 

3rd refugee shelter torched in Sweden in 6 days

"İsveç'te son 6 gün içinde yakılan üçüncü göçmen sığınağı" 

haber linki

Refugees Camp in FRANCE - link

Refugees Camp in TURKEY

2 million more.....comes to Turkey!!!

2 Milyon daha geliyor ! haber linki

Alman basının iddiasına göre hali hazırda 2 milyon civarında Suriyeli'ye ev sahipliği 

yapan Türkiye 2 milyon Suriyeli daha alacak.

// AVRUPA'DA GÖÇMEN KRİZİ VARMIŞ !

// ŞİMDİ ANLADINIZ MI MERKEL NİYE GELDİ!

Demokratik ve hümanist geçinen "Avrupa"..... Sebep olduğu karmaşa ve kaostan doğan olayların sonuçlarına uzaktan bakmayı tercih eder. O uzaktan bakmada da sana sadaka verir, gerisini de senin sırtına yükler, Ayrıca kendisini de "seni eleştirebilecek bir konumda" zanneder!... SB.

AVRUPA BİRLİĞİNDEKİ OSMANLI VE TÜRKİYE

AVRUPA KONSEYİ ONUNCU YIL BASKISI 1949-1959 /STRASBURG

TÜRKÇE OLARAK

MEĞER 1949'DA TÜRKİYE AVRUPA KONSEYİ'NİN ÜYESİYMİŞ....

DERLER Kİ, MENDERES BAŞVURDU 1959'DA 

AVRUPA'YA GİRMEK İÇİN...

ŞİMDİ O BAŞVURU, O SÜRECİN BİR AŞAMASI

İNÖNÜ DÖNEMİNDE VE HENÜZ 

CUMHURİYET HALK PARTİSİ İKTİDARINDA, 

TÜRKİYE AVRUPA KONSEYİNE DAVET EDİLMİŞ.

GELİN BU KONSEYE ÜYE OLUN...

BİZİMKİLERDE DÜŞÜNMÜŞLER VE KARARIMIZ 

BU KONSEYE GİRMEKTİR DEMİŞLER...

ALKIŞLANARAK TÜRKİYE BU KONSEYE ÜYE 

OLARAK GİRMİŞ...

OSMANLI GİRDİ YETMİŞ YILDA BATTI...

TÜRKİYE GİRİŞ TARİHİ 1949, 

PEKİ O ZAMAN BİZ NEREYE GİRMEYE ÇALIŞIYORUZ?

BURADA ÇOK ÖNEMLİ BİR ŞEY DAHA VAR...

AVRUPA KONSEYİ 1949-1959 KİTAPÇIĞI 

TÜRKÇE OLARAK BASILMIŞ...

YANİ, 

TÜRKÇENİN AVRUPA KONSEYİNDE RESMİ DİL OLARAK , O TARİHLERDE TANINIYOR OLMASININ KANITIDIR....

BUGÜN İÇİN BİZİM DİLİMİZ AVRUPA'DA PEK DE KULLANILAN, KABUL GÖREN BİR DİL DEĞİL...

TÜRKİYE AVRUPA İLİŞKİLERİNDE HERKES 

İNGİLİZCE FRANSIZCA ALMANCA KONUŞUYOR, TÜRKÇEYİ KONUŞAN YOK...

KİTAPÇIKTA "ÜYE MEMLEKETLER" BAŞLIĞI ALTINDA:

BELÇİKA, DANİMARKA, FRANSA, İRLANDA, İTALYA, LÜKSEMBURG, HOLLANDA, NORVEÇ, İSVEÇ VE İNGİLTERE OLMAK ÜZERE ON MEMLEKET AVRUPA KONSEYİ STATÜSÜNÜ LONDRA'DA İMZALAMIŞTIR.

1949 AĞUSTOSUNDA AKDETTİĞİ İLK TOPLANTISINDA VEKİLLER KOMİTESİ YUNANİSTAN, İZLANDA VE TÜRKİYE'Yİ BU ON MEMLEKETE KATILMAYA DAVET ETTİ. BU DAVETİ DERHAL MÜSPET KARŞILAYAN YUNANİSTAN İLE TÜRKİYE , GEREK VEKİLLER KOMİTESİNİN GEREKSE İŞTİGARE MECLİSİNİN İLK OTURUMLARINA TEMSİLCİLER GÖNDERDİLER.

....AVRUPA KONSEYİ'NİN GİDERLERİNİN YÜZDE ONUNU TÜRKİYE KARŞILIYOR....

BÜTÇESİ:

ÜYE MEMLEKETLERİN HALİ HAZIRDA KABUL EDİLEN İŞTİRAK PAYLARI ŞÖYLEDİR.

FRANSA ........... 17.73

FEDERAL ALMANYA......17.73

İTALYA................17.73

İNGİLTERE.........17.73

TÜRKİYE..............9.06

HOLLANDA...

BELÇİKA ...

YUNANİSTAN...

İSVEÇ...

1949 YILINDA AVRUPA KONSEYİ İLE İLİŞKİLERİMİZ BAŞLADI, ŞUAN ÜZERİNDEN 60 YILA YAKIN 58 YIL GEÇTİ, OSMANLI 1856 YILINDA AVRUPA BİRLİĞİNE GİRDİ 

1918'TE TARİHTEN SİLİNDİ....

TÜRKİYE'NİN KAÇ YILI KALMIŞ?

BU AVRUPA ÖYLE BİR MERET Kİ , 

İÇİNE ALDIĞI TÜRK'Ü YETMİŞ YILDA BİTİRİYOR...

AMA KENDİ KALIYOR...

Osmanlı 1856 yılında Avrupa Birliğine girmişti.

Napolyon Avrupa'yı kan ve ateşe boğmuş , Avrupa Devletleri Fransa'yı ancak birleştirerek durdurabilmişti. İngiltere, Avusturya, Rusya ve Prusya 1814'te Fransa yüzünden bozulan Avrupa dengesini yeniden kurmak üzere Viyana Kongresi düzenleyip Avrupa Korosu adını verdikleri bir birlik oluşturdular, bu birlik düşmanları Fransa'yı bile aralarına çağrırken Osmanlı Devleti'ni Avrupa Korosuna almamışlardı.

O yıllarda Avrupa basınında yer alan ve Avrupa Birliğinin ilk temelleri sayılan bu birliğe ait karikatürler Osmanlı Devletini kör ve topal bir zavallı olarak ilan ediyordu.

1838 Balta Limanı Antlaşmasıyla Gümrük Egemenliğini İngiltere'ye terk eden Osmanlı yine Avrupa Devletler Konseyi'ne girememişti.

1839'da tahta çıkan Abdülmecid 1839 Tanzimat Fermanını yayınlamış ve başta İngiltere olmak üzere Avrupa Devletlerinin tüm isteklerini anayasal güvence altına almıştır.

Abdülmecid'in tüm isteği Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nun varlığını ve toprak bütünlüğünü güvence altına almaktı, hem de Avrupa Devletler Konseyinde.

Abdülmecid, Avrupa Devletleri isteği üzerine Rusya'ya savaş açar. Osmanlı donanması Sinop'ta Rusların baskınıyla yenilir ve bu yenilginin ardından "Senin için öldüler Avrupa" diye bir de madalya bastırır.

15 Mayıs 1854 Rusya yayılmasını durdurmak üzere bu sefer Bulgaristan, Osmanlı ordusu Rus ordusunu yener. Abdülmecid bu sefer de "Senin için savaştık senin için yendik Avrupa" diye bir madalya bastırır. Bütün Avrupa Devletlerine dağıtır.

Bu çabaların sonucu olarak Osmanlı Devleti'nin toprak bütünlüğünün Avrupa Devletleri tarafından koruyan ve Osmanlıyı bir Avrupa Devletler Konseyi üyesi olarak tanımlayan Paris Barış Antlaşması 30 Mart 1856'te imzalanır.

Osmanlıyı Avrupa Devletler Konseyine üye yapan Paris Barış Antlaşmasıyla , ilgili ülkelerin devlet başkanları tarafından onaylandıktan sonra yürürlüğe girmiş, konsey üyelerini bir arada gösteren resim tarihe not düşmüştü.

Osmanlı Türkiye'den önce Avrupa Birliği üyesi olmuştu 

ama ne pahasına...

BEDELİNİ BU MİLLET ÇOK ACI ÖDEDİ....

 CENGİZ ÖZAKINCI

PROGRAMIN VİDEOSU

BU TARİHSEL OLAYLARI OKULLARDA OKUTMAZLAR, OKUTULMASINA İZİN VERMEZLER

ZATEN BU YÜZDEN TARİH TEKERRÜR EDİYOR....

_________

WHO IS THE TERROSISTS ? AND THE TURKISH GENOCIDE

Arrest Obama Under NDAA For Supporting Terrorists in Syria. The evidence that FSA militants in Syria are being led by Al-Qaeda terrorists and are carrying out terrorist atrocities is overwhelming. 

Under the terms of the National Defense Authorization Act that he personally signed into law, President Barack Obama should immediately be arrested and indefinitely detained for providing support to Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria.

*Read more: infowars ALEX JONES

NOT ONLY AL-QAEDA BUT ALSO ISIS (İŞİD) 

WHO IS KILLING THE TURKS IN IRAQ

CHANGE BORDERS IN MIDDLE EAST

ONLY TO BUILD A BIG ISRAEL 

THEY DON'T GIVE A CRAP 

OF DEMOCRACY OR HUMANITY

ISIS AND AL-NUSRA MERGE ON SYRIA-IRAQ BORDER
In April it was reported the CIA transfers weapons from “moderate” mercenaries in Syria to al-Nusra. The delivery was revealed by Jamal Maarouf of the Syrian Revolutionary Front. Aaron Klein, writing for WND, reported last week that ISIS received training from the U.S. military in Jordan.


Read more: Infowars ALEX JONES

TURKMENS IN IRAQ / THE TURKS !

UYGHURS  /  THE TURKS !

SREBRENITSA - BOSNA / THE TURKS !

BULGARIAN TURKS / THE TURKS !

KHOJALY / THE TURKS !

KIRIM-CRIMEA / THE TURKS !

AKHALTSIKHE-AHISKA TURKS / THE TURKS  !

CYPRUS TURKS / THE TURKS

TURKISH GENOCIDE AND NOT ARMENIAN / THE TURKS !

TURKISH GENOCIDE IN TURKEY BY ARMENIAN

ENGLISH SUBT. VIDEO

THE ONLY CRIME WAS THAT THEY WERE  THE TURKS !

BU ÜLKEDE 1938' DEN BERİ NE ÇEKİYORSAK

HEPSİNDE SİZİN PARMAK İZİNİZ VAR...

BU MİLLET YÜZYILLARDIR NE ÇEKİYORSA

HEPSİDE SİZİN KISKANÇLIĞINIZ YÜZÜNDEN

EY AVRUPA,

EY ABD,

EY İSRAİL,

EY ÇİN,

EY RUSYA,

EY ERMENİSTAN,

EY YUNANİSTAN

TÜRK OLARAK

SİZİN YAPTIĞINIZ KÖTÜLÜKLERİ ASLA UNUTMAYACAĞIZ

SEN DE UNUTMA !

KESER DÖNER

SAP DÖNER

GÜN GELİR

HESAP DÖNER

______________________________________

DÜŞMANIM , 

DÜŞMANLIĞINDAN VAZGEÇİNCEYE KADAR 

BEN DE ONUN 

AMANSIZ DÜŞMANIYIM

M.KEMAL ATATÜRK 

(1881 - 193∞)

______________________________________

VIEWS OF THE EUROPEANS ABOUT TÜRKİYE AND THE TURKISH ARMY

A lot of heads of state, thinkers and authors wrote about the Turks in their various books. In my article I will try to give brief examples of some of these writings.

The Turks established many states in Asia, Europe and Africa in a time period of more than 2,000 years.

The obvious characteristic of all the states established by the Turks is that they all had an atmosphere of freedom and tolerance in terms of individual rights and liberties.

The nations and minorities who lived under the rule of Turks did not lose their identities; instead they became rich and developed. They freely used their own languages and practiced their religions in churches and synagogues.

The objective western writers who had a chance to get to know the Turks wrote about the hospitality, honesty, helpfulness and cleanliness of Turks as well as the peace and safety of Turkish public life.

They also wrote about the patriotism and courage of the Turks. Napoleon Bonaparte said, “The Turks can be killed but not defeated”.

The Seljuks and the Ottomans did not force countries and their people to assimilate. In contrast, they invited them to be a part of the state. Osman Gazi, the builder of the Ottoman State, did not take decisions without consulting Byzantine thinkers and Christian congregations.

F. Babinger: “Everybody was happy with their lives. There was complete religious freedom, and nobody faced any difficulties because of his or her religion.

F. Grenard: “Under the Ottoman authority the public was completely free to speak their native languages and to practice their religion.

The Serbian Prince sent a board to Sultan Mehmet the Conqueror asking what liberties he would give the Serbians if they were allowed to govern their state by themselves. In response to this Sultan Mehmet the Conqueror said: “I will allow you to build a church next to every single mosque and let people practise their religion in them.”

Genoese Chenier: “Some Protestant French planned to take refuge in one of the Ottoman countries. The reason for this was the unchanging tolerance of the Turks. By the end of 1717 some French people had moved to Istanbul because of this.”

Famous European jurist, Prof. M. Philip Marshall Brown, stated the following in his book “Foreigners in Türkiye and Their Legal Status” published in 1914: “The fact is that the Turks, out of their generosity and willingness, allowed the countries that they conquered to allow their own culture and traditions to live on.”

We can also give Sultan Mehmet the Conqueror’s edict as an example in this matter.

This edict, allowing freedom and liberties to those from different religious and ethnic backgrounds, was written in Milodraz on 28 May 1463, after the Conquest of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

The original script of this edict is in Franciscan Catholic Church in Fojnica, Bosnia-Herzegovina. The first known and the oldest human rights manifesto, this edict was put into practice 326 years before French Revolution, 485 years before the 1948 International Human Rights Declaration, and 29 years before the discovery of America. This edict, signed and sealed by Sultan Mehmet, Conqueror of the Worlds and the Magnificent, reads as follows:

I, Sultan Mehmet declare to the world that all the Bosnian Franciscans who are subject to this edict are under my patronage and I command:

“Let nobody disturb or do harm to those mentioned above or their churches. Let everyone who became refugees of our state live freely and in peace and safety. They are free to migrate to all the lands of my empire and reside in their monasteries.

Nobody, be they notables of the throne, viziers, civil servants, or the citizens of the state may humiliate these people or do harm to them. Nobody may endanger their well-being, their property or churches. Moreover, people invited to our lands by these refugees will also have the same privileges.

I swear into office hereupon to Allah the Almighty, creator of earth and sky, our Prophet Mohammed, the messenger of Allah, the 124 thousand prophets, and the sword I wear that nobody under my authority may violate this edict as long as they are loyal to the state.


b. The views of French thinkers and writers


1. Napoleon Bonaparte’s Views about Turks
“There are two virtues that elevate mankind: men being courageous and women being chaste and upright. In addition to this there is another virtue that honors both sexes: to sacrifice one’s self for his/her country. Turks are these kinds of heroes.


2. French Traveler Du Loir’s Views about Turks
Du Loir expressed his impressions of Türkiye in ten letters he sent between 28 November 1639 and 13 June 1641. These letters, included in the book “Les Voyages du Sieur Loir “published in Paris in 1654, mention the following about Türkiye.

“The Turks are good by birth. They are very sincere and modest. They fear feelings of enmity or revenge against others. They say they forgive their enemies before religious festivals and make peace.

They have houses called “imaret” to protect people and animals. In these houses all poor people get help regardless of their religion in proportion with their needs.

Some Turks build fountains, bridges, and roads for charity.

The rich give Islamic alms (money given as a religious duty) to the poor and help them with everything.


3. Grelot’s Views about Turks
The French traveler Grelot mentions the following about Türkiye in his book called,”Relation Nouvelle d’un Voyage de Constantinople = Bir İstanbul Gezginin Yeni Hikayesi” published in Paris in 1680.

“The refugees in the hands of Turks are not treated badly. They are like the second gentlemen of the house. Some refugees who were allowed to return to their countries came back to Türkiye again. They are never forced to change their religions.

They consider cleanliness as a main rule. They build a lot of public baths. The Turks eat little, and are satisfied with it.


4. Kont Bonneval’s (Humbaracı Ahmet Pasha) Views
He worked in the time of Ahmet III in the Ottoman office. He wrote his views about Turks in his book, “Anecdotes Venitiennes et Turques, ou nouveaux memoirs du Comte de Bonneval” published in Frankfurt in 1740.

“Although there are 2 million people in Istanbul, there are no beggars at all. All Turks, without even a single exception, are charitable. They all help the needy and establish charitable foundations for animals.”

“They do not commit injustices, do not lend money with excessive interest, and do not steal. In short, they are honest and you are impressed by them.”


5. Chateubriand’s Views
Born in Saint-Malo in 1768, the author wrote books on Christianity.
His views are mentioned in the newspaper “Des Debats” and he talks about Turks as the following in his book named “De Paris a Jerusalem”:

“The Turkish nation is really tolerant and compassionate. They allow the realities to continue although they themselves do not adopt them. Although it comes from their confidence in their power, this tolerance is a noble attitude.”


6. Alphonse De Lamartine’s Views
Poet and writer, Lamartine was born in Macon in 1790. He came to Türkiye in 1850.

He wrote the following in “Le Voyage en Orient” 

“The Turks are the most upright nation on earth both as a nation and as a race. Their race is so clean and sublime. Their religion and virtues impress all impartial people. Their land is a land of heroes, gentlemen, and martyrs. Being an enemy of such a nation is no different from being an enemy to mankind. Let God protect me from such a thing.”


7. Pierre Loti’s Views
A naval military officer, the writer lived 1850 to 1923. He was born in Rocheport. He tells about Turks as follows:

“In order not to understand Turks you have to do away with history. The Turk’s dignified manner against unfair slanders comes from the fact that they believe biased people are incapable of understanding facts and so they pity them. This noble attitude is so beautiful an answer to false slanders against the Turks.

In his writing about the 1911 Ottoman-Italian war he said, “The Turks do not let others humiliate them.”

“Now, the western countries at war with Türkiye are secretly trying to get privileges from Türkiye, and this reminds me of hyenas around a lion. But why do they demand sacrifices from Türkiye? What did Türkiye do to them?”

Many impartial war correspondents gave true testimonies about Türkiye. Even they say that Turks despite being hungry and exhausted are satisfied with getting only a slice of bread from doors when they pass through a Greek village, without doing any harm. In Europe there are people who claim Turkish soldiers are looting. To protest against this is our primary duty. We did not witness anything other than patience, endurance, uprightness, and mercifulness. 

(From his writing of December 1912)
and in Turkish book : 
Pierre Loti - Can Çekişen Türkiye - 1914: kitap


8. Claude Ferrere’s Views
He was born in Lyon in 1876 and was admitted as a member of the “French Academy”, an honour only famous writers may attain.

After the First World War, France occupied the regions of Maraş, Adana, and Mersin. The writer at that time supported this idea: In the Middle East the French and Turkish self-interests lie in the same direction. If France is defeated its supremacy in the Middle East will end. In an effort to help the Balkan countries, France unknowingly creates a situation to its own detriment.”

The writer’s foresight became real 50-60 years later. French culture lost its dominance in Anatolia and the Middle East. He writes about Türkiye as follows:

“If I say I disliked the Turks when I left France for Türkiye in the summer of 1902, believe me. In fact, all French students finishing college thought so, because during their education they were fed with prejudices. If I say I returned to my homeland as a comrade to Turks, from head to foot, believe me again. All military officers come back with the same feelings I had because all knew that Turks are always right in every single fight in the East.


B. The Views of German Thinkers

1. Friedrich-Karl Kienitz’s Views
“The independence wars that started in south-eastern Europe meant the end of Ottoman rule first in Greece and then in Serbia. Most of the Muslims had to emigrate. Everything was done to eliminate Ottoman rule. The mosques were demolished or turned into churches; Muslim’s houses were destroyed. Only bazaars, fountains and public baths remained.”


2. Henri Nivet’s Views about Turks
“In the Balkan Wars the Balkan media wrote about what Turks did to them, but in a dignified manner the Turks tried not to mention the murders, tortures, looting, rapes they were subject to.”

“The reason behind the Eastern Question is the tolerance and nobility the Turks exhibited against defeated Christians. Turks could have done what the Spanish inquisitors did 500 years before or they could have tried to assimilate them under their administration, as some European countries did. But the Turks chose neither of these methods, which could have greatly affected the Christians. The Ottoman Government did not use any of the privileges conquests give them.”


3. Lietunant General Von Kres’ Views
He served on the Sinai front as a commander. He said:
In WW1 most of the Turkish public were in favour of peace and were expecting Türkiye to remain neutral in the war.

The Turks recruited 2.800.000 soldiers of which 2 million died in combat or through illness.
The Turkish soldiers were wonderful; courageous, enduring, and they had foresight. They were born soldiers.

Von Kress says the following about the Armenian Question: “When the Turks were fighting against the Russians, the Armenians began gang fights with martial help from France and Britain. They destroyed roads and disrupted supplies to the Turkish army. For this reason some regions were abandoned to Russia without any fighting. Armenians died in these fights but the number of Turkish dead was no less, and the Turks were victims of Armenian treachery. In such conditions of treachery and enmity the Turks had the right to protect themselves.”

Baron von Kress, who was a commander on the Sinai Front, says the following in his book published by the “Asia Warriors” Foundation:

“When considering Turkish military victory in WW1, one should keep in mind that it actually meant three defeats and one revolution. In these wars Türkiye lost a lot of its ammunition and was not able to restock them in a timely manner.

“When Türkiye entered the war, its Treasury was exhausted, its ammunitions and other military requirement such as food and clothing were insufficient and could not be added to. In view of these difficult conditions the Turkish service in war is both impressive and to praiseworthy.”


4. Major Mulman’s Views
Mulman praised the Turks in his book about the Çanakkale conflict:
“From 1912 on, despite the failings of the economic and political institutes, the Ottomans displayed heroism that it is unmatched in history. Türkiye depended partially upon the help of Germany and the Austria-Hungary Empire, but the heroism in combat is a direct result of the Turks themselves and their spiritual strength.”

“WW1 conflicts proved the Turks' prowess on the offensive.”

The Turks and the Germans were allied until the end of the war. Turks competed with each other in defying death, loyalty to duty, heroism, and sacrificing one’s self for the motherland. The Turks impressed the most powerful armies of the world. Despite the administrative inefficiency of the state the Turks deserved to be praised for their achievements.”

“At the very beginning of the war (25 May 1915) the XIX. Division was proceeding in cheers. The commander of this division was Mustafa Kemal, the president of the Turkish Republic, then a lieutenant colonel. The intelligence did not come in a timely manner, and it was vague, but Mustafa Kemal did foresee the danger and guessed the enemy commander’s plan. He thus stopped the 27th regiment of the 9th division. The artillery bombardment was growing ever more intense. The Turkish advance was proceeding across a broad front and successfully routing the Australian groups. Mustafa Kemal himself was bringing the battery to bear and leading the whole division. The landing was now fully under fire but the troops were advancing to the shore, and by 7.30 a.m. 8,000 troops had reached Gallipoli; 12,000 by 2pm troops. In this steep and difficult land, the soldiers entrapped in holes and small trenches under fire could not save their lives; both sides held on to what they already had. The Australians and the Turks were attacking with bayonets; both sides suffered great losses and were exhausted."

“An hour of firing and by the ironclad ‘Albion’ in preparation for the infantry assault ended. Other ships were firing on Turkish villages and defensive positions. After the British rifle company left, traces of life began to emerge and a close fight restarted, and the British, were able to control the village after sustaining heavy losses. But it wasn’t the end yet. A few miles away another Turkish group conducted a bayonet charge against the British ignoring the powerful British rifle fire.”


C. The Views of English Writers and Thinkers about Turks

1. Ricault’s Views
In the time of Sultan Mehmet he served as a secretary to the British Ambassador Count Winshesley and lived in Türkiye for five years before writing his book.

“I believe the victories won by the Turks are a result of their enigmatic and extraordinary power. Moreover, I witnessed this in the ban on alcohol and getting drunk. Banning alcohol makes soldiers more attentive and obedient. There was no fighting or noise in the Turkish camps.

There were no complaints of looting, rape or any kind of disorderly conduct from the places Turkish troops passed through.”


2. Sir James Porter’s Views
James Porter’s impressions of Türkiye while he was the Britain's ambassador in Istanbul were told in a two-edition book called “Sir James Porter” published in London. This book was translated into French in the name of “Observations sur La religion, Les Loix, La Gouvernement et Les Moeurs des Turcs=Türklerin Dini, Kanunlar, Hükûmeti ve Gelenekleri Hakkında Gözlemler.”

“In Türkiye there were no incidents of theft, swindling, or pick pocketing. In war and peace the roads were as safe as houses. In particular, it was quite possible to go anywhere in the empire using the main roads.

“As the justice rules were being applied swiftly and strictly crimes were being prevented.
“I met a Christian in his national garment. This man told me that although he passed through and went around the Turkish troops preparing to be sent to Iran, he wasn’t asked a single question or was detained from his way.”


3. Lord Byron’s Views
Grandson of an English admiral, Byron was born in London in 1788.
“Turks are neither two-faced nor dishonest. They never betray themselves. They do not kill except in war. They knew how to use their swords, but also how to care for a wounded opponent.”


4. Lord Beaconsfield’s Views
His real name was Benjamin Disraeli, a Lord, and was born in London in 1805. He wrote about the places he traveled to in his book “Young Duke”.

“In 1853 our diplomats brought us a horrible project and a very funny phrase. The project was based on how to divide the Ottoman lands and the funny phrase was “sick man”, which was used to describe Turks.

I want to say that the Turk is not sick. Ambitions both domestic and foreign perhaps portrayed this noble nation as being sick. But the Turk proved his courage and strength under all conditions. My opinion is that TURKS ARE THE NECESSARY MEANS FOR BALANCE IN EUROPE. Let us not disregard the Turks’ historic virtues, and high abilities.”


5. William Pitt’s Views
William Pitt the Younger was the prime minister from 1783 to 1801 and the son of the William Pitt who had been president.

The following sentences was stated by William Pitt upon the French invasion of Egypt and were published in his book “Big Politicians”

“In an effort to free Egypt we not only tried to create a path for Christians but also wanted to defend the Turks’ rights and privileges, which were being violated. The Turks were subject to unjust treatment although the only things they adhere to are justice and the facts.”


6. F. W. Von Herbert’s Views
Herbert, whose father and forefathers are British, served in the British and Ottoman armies.

His book “Plevne Müdafaası” was first published in 1895, and again in 1911. He was taken as a refugee by the Russians on 10 December 1877, and after staying in Kharkov, returned to England on 3 April 1878.

“The Turkish soldiers were so patient, enduring and persistent that it is impossible not to quote this from Moltke:”

“Turks never lost the spirit of a soldier. They displayed endurance, obedience, and strength in conditions where soldiers of other armies easily lost the spirit.”

“The distance of 115 miles from Vidin to Plevne was walked in seven days. This means 16 miles a day. Our soldiers were loading and discharging their weapons with extraordinary agility. These were the pride of the Turkish infantry who had been trained well to fire at a rapid rate.”

“These soldiers relaxed only for six hours after seven days walk and ate only small pieces of bread. Their feet got swollen and they were limping terribly. Exhaustion, hunger, and heat were almost deadly. (This incident took place on 20 July 1877 in the First Plevne War).”

“(30 July 1877, Second Plevne War). The People of Plevne were celebrating victory in streets. These people were very loyal to state. As they told me, these people carried food and ammunition to the front during the clash between Yunus Bey and Skobelef braving the bullets. These people also showed us the way, too.

“One patriotic man sufficed to stay in his kitchen and let the other parts of his house be used as a hospital.”

“That the Turks killed wounded soldiers is a complete lie on the part of a few partisans. The Turks treated other soldiers as they treated their own comrades.”

“For four and a half months, a commander (Gazi Osman Pasha), put up a dignified challenge against the Russians, who brought almost unlimited forces to the front. Only hunger and insufficient sources were able to defeat him. And Todleben, who had became famous in Sivastopol, realized this fact and persuaded Russians that they had to be patient.”

Grand duke Nikolai, the Commander of the Russian forces, recounted the conditions as follows in his letter to the prince of Romania:

“Come to our aid. No matter how or from where you can, just come to our aid because the Turks are wiping us out.”

“The Russian attack lasted four days. (7-10 September 1877). During this time we lost 500 men. The enemy’s loss was 2,000. Forget being discouraged, the Turks were laughing at the Russian batteries. This was all the enemy managed to achieve in four days of wasting 30,000 cannonballs.”

“The Turks defended Gorna Dubrik courageously for ten hours with 3,500 soldiers and four artillery pieces against 20,000 Russians and 60 artillery pieces. That night, the Russians took advantage of the night and suddenly attacked the Turkish forces, which had to surrender.”

“Here Turkish soldiers displayed great heroism under Ahmet Hıfzı Pasha.”

Disobedience and disrespect were so rare among the Turks. Dissent, rebellion and such never occurred.

The soldiers loved their commanders and unquestionably obeyed them would willingly sacrifice their lives for them.44 The number of deserters was less than 200. This means three soldiers a division a month.

Despite all the deprivation and suffering, their courage, passion and obedience were extraordinary. This shows a characteristic virtue of a race.

The situation was ever worsening. Plevne camp became graveyard. An army of 40,000 soldiers were gradually dying of hunger, exhaustion and deprivation. There was no one without some kind of sickness.

“The field marshal gathered all priests and made them swear on the Bible that they would maintain the well-being of all refugees, but when the break out attack failed these Turkish soldiers were mercillessly killed.”

The civil administration in Plevne served well despite all deprivation and shortages until the last day. They protected everybody no matter what religion they belong to, and those who committed rape were severely punished.”

“The Courts were always open and on duty, and the cases were tackled impartially. The fact that there were no incidents of rape or looting during the seven weeks proves that the administration did its job very well.”


7. Charles S. Ryan’s Views
Born in Melbourne in 1852, he entered the Ottoman army as a doctor soldier in 1877.

“I am sure there is not a single army in Europe as courageous as the Turkish soldiers, who fought in Plevne under the command of Osman Pasha.”

“(20 July 1877) I saw two Bulgarian horse carts carrying the wounded soldiers. And only the very wounded were being carried in carts. Other less wounded soldiers were being dragged with great difficulty and pain. As the coarse rough and uncomfortable carts went along the steep and rocky roads the soldiers’ pain doubled. So you can imagine the pain of a soldier whose hips was broken in a few places. As the carts jolted the pain must have been unbearable.”

“Osman Pasha was very strict in discipline and during all the battles in Plevne he maintained remarkable order and discipline.”

“At that time the newspapers accused Osman Pasha of treating Bulgarians badly. I can strongly stress the fact that far from treat them badly Osman Pasha treated the Bulgarians in complete fairness.”

“(3 September 1877) Osman Pasha applied very strict punishments in order to prevent looting. This very night an incident of this kind proved how sincere he was in that matter.”

“When our groups were passing on our way through the Bulgarian villages we came across a tobacco farm. A Turkish soldier who could not resist his smoking habit jumped over the fence and put tobacco leaves into his pockets. Osman Pasha noticed this and deprived the staff sergeant of his rank, making him a private again.”

“In our hospitals we had 5,000 injured soldiers and probably 3,500 of these had gotten wounded between 5 September and 12 October 1877. The rest were the soldiers of earlier conflicts. Some of these were so wounded that they could not be sent to Sofia for treatment. During the harsh fighting in September the Russians encircled us and our correspondence with the outside was cut, so the number of the wounded was ever increasing. The soldiers were cramped in rooms, which could accommodate only ten people. But there were thirty in one room, then. “

“No one who did not admire the Turks’ patience and heroism in war could not have endured what İ endured.”

“In the winter of 1877 the conditions in Erzurum became so harsh that the hospitals were full with patients. The cold made the patients’ conditions far worse.”

“Typhus, gangrene and pneumonia were to the advantage of Russians as these illnesses killed more soldiers than the Russian attacks. At nights the heat was below - 40 and every morning we witnessed four or five soldiers who had frozen to death at night. These heroes were found with their guns clasped to their chests and their eyes closed.”

“As Ahmet Muhtar Pasha narrated, the Russians who invaded Kars sent 2,000 Turkish soldiers to Erzurum on foot in winter. Not surprisingly only 317 of these were able to reach Erzurum. One of the soldiers told me that they were thirty soldiers at the beginning but now only ten, seven of whom had frostbite on their feet. Imagine, just for one time, what these soldiers endured coming 180 miles on snow dragging their wounded bodies. The hands of these soldiers were already frozen in March and during the journey in the snow, their hands were just bones. Their flesh from their ankles to the end of their hands decayed and turned black.”

“In the city of Erzurum, the conditions were getting worse and worse for everybody. Supplies were quickly running out. When Muhtar Pasha was summoned to Istanbul, Kurt Ismail Pasha, who took his stead, went to great lengths. By the end of December, it was decided that the evacuation of certain people from the city was necessary and 400 men and 200 women and children set out for Erzincan (five days’ walking distance).”

“This journey’s hardship was more than that of the journey to Kars. When these people were a day distance from Erzurum they were caught in a blizzard. When the men came back to look for the women and children they had already frozen to death. The soldiers who were able to return to Erzurum died of sickness, too, after a few days. This was a real catastrophe.”

“Now it is time to bring my book to a close, but before writing my last words I have to express my admiration of the Turkish soldiers, with whom I was friends for two years. Even in time of catastrophe, the Turks displayed the real merits of heroes throughout the wars.”


8. Sir Achmead Bartlet’s Views
One of the English MPs, Sir Ached Bartlet went to Teselia to observe the Ottoman-Greek war.
The following lines come from his memoirs:

“In the ten months following the 1894 December, the correspondents wrote untrue accounts of the confusion in the region. They unjustly accused the Turks of bad deeds. When the Turks defended themselves against some terrorists and killed a few hundred enemies, the British newspapers exaggerated this number up to 30 or 40,000 and gave untrue accounts.”

“Turkish soldiers are the most courageous of the world.”

“On the battlefield the politeness and good manners of the Turks were beyond my comprehension. As there was lack of water and it was really hot we asked for water from them and they gave us water without any hesitation or discontent.”

“Daily Mirror correspondent Mr. Stones related the following in his letter to his newspaper: 

“The Turks have the best soldiers of the world. The Turkish soldiers are perseverant, courageous and obedient in times of difficulties and deprivation. If Turkish soldiers pass past through a street having bakeries on both sides and his commander tells not to get anything to eat, he will obey that command.”

Myself, an MP of the British Parliament, together with British newspaper correspondents (Times correspondent Clive Bigham, Standard correspondent Montgomery, Daily Telegraph private correspondent Pill, Roulther Agency correspondent Govn, Daily Mail correspondent Istivens, Morning Post correspondent Hamilton Veldan) mentioned the following points in our telegraph to Britain Istanbul envoy Filip Kuru.

“I am the witness to the truthfulness and obedience of the Turkish soldiers. The rumours regarding murders and looting on the part of the Turks are a lie. The night after the conquest of Yenişehir’s Seyfullah Pasha, Mustafa Natık, and Necip Bey made soldiers patrol the city so as to prevent undesirable incidents. Ethem Pasha, upon entering Yenişehir, assigned guards to protect the Christian churches.”

“The owners of hotels and shops in Yenişehir escaped from the city one day before the conquest. However, upon hearing the good manners of the Turks, they came back. The Greeks were not treated harshly by the Turks and were not attacked.”

“In Alasonia, Greek families lived in security.”

“The manners of the Ottoman soldiers were praiseworthy in every sense, and we can assure that the endeavors of the Turkish military officers to protect Christian’s properties resulted in great gratitude on the part of the Christians. The Residents of Yenişehir and nearby villages demanded Ottoman rule.”


9. Clive Bigham’s Views about Turks
The author of “Teselya’da Osmanlı Ordusu”, British Captain Clive Bigham, wrote all he saw in war as the correspondent of the newspaper Times.

“I was surprised to see the rate of the casualties among the soldiers going to the border from Thessalonika was no more than %5. The Turkish soldiers were coming from Asia Minor hundreds of miles away. They were strong and this probably came from their modest and simple lifestyles.”

“The Ottomans were so merciful and fair that they did not use the authority of the rules of war. On the battlefield the penalties were in cash fines. German colonel Von Sonenberg said he wished that he could have had the chance to make his country’s soldiers witness the courage, loyalty, and good manners of the Turks.”


10. The Views of the Anzacs about Turks

a. Attending 1877 Plevne War as a second lieutenant doctor, and then fighting in Çanakkale in 1915 General Charles Ryan wrote the following in his book “Under the Red Cross - Kızılhaç Altında”:

“I devoted myself to the Turkish Cause. I loved those brave soldiers who resisted difficulties in such a noble way. I felt devoted to the Turkish Cause with all my heart and soul.”

The opinions of other nations, who claim to be modern, have a wrong and misleading conception about Turks.

“I was so surprised to witness the good treatment of the Turks for the Bulgarians. I did not see even a single Bulgarian treated unfairly. I have to state this fact as a responsibility.”


b. Fighting in Gallipoli in the 1st Engineering Company, Sergeant Mansfield David Romsey wrote the following in his letter to Turkish author Baha Vefa Karatay:

“In Gallipoli our side had great respect for the Turks. Moreover, as this respect deepened it turned into affection. The Turk was not only a perfect soldier but also an upright and noble enemy in our eyes. We were convinced that no other army could defend their homeland better than Turks. There was a mutual respect and sympathy between New Zealanders and the Turks, which I hope will continue with future generations”


d. Fighting in the 9th Australian Cavalry Regiment, Harold Cilve Newhan mentioned the following in his letter to Baha Vefa Karatay:

“In the war in Gallipoli, we were most affected by the Turkish soldiers’ gentlemanliness. Our hospital ship, which had been anchored off the Anzac shore, was under Turkish artillery guard. If our ships came near the hospital, there was no fire. Such incidents created a great respect and sympathy towards the Turkish.”


e. Lord Casey, who fought as Australia’s General Envoy between 1967-1971 stated the following:

“We left that peninsula with a great respect for the Turkish nation. You are the sons of a courageous and humane nation.”

“Serving as the commander of the 5th Turkish Army in Çanakkale German General Liman Von Sanders said: ‘I did not witness any cruelty from Turks against those who came to kill them and dismiss them from their homeland. They were carrying wounded enemy soldiers into entrenchments and bandaging their wounds tearing apart their own shirts.’ ”


11. Alan Moorehead’s Views about Turks
“During the seven-hour bombardment of Kilitbahir in the Battle for Çanakkale those who witnessed the heroism of Turks talk about it with great admiration. The Turks did not escape the fire but went into it. That’s to say, they were firing disregarding the bombs and shell fragments exploding around their heads.”

“(17 April 1915) A British submarine was sunk. Lewis Einstein, English envoy in Istanbul, said that Turks behaved uprightly in that incident.”

“While the English soldiers were floating in the sea, the Turks on the shore dived into the water to rescue them. The dead were first buried somewhere on the shore and then taken to the British graveyard. The Turks treated the wounded as guests in hospitals and offered them candy.”

“(25 April 1915, the day allied forces landed on the shore) That day the Turks fought with extraordinary heroism and although they were far more outgunned, they did not lose their courage for a moment. There was not a faintest example of indiscipline. They always kept their discipline and self-composure.”

A low ranking commander but a genius, Mustafa Kemal’s presence was a most unfortunate situation in the war for the allied powers, because were it not for Mustafa Kemal, the Australians and New Zealanders could have captured Conkbayırı that morning and thus put an end to the Battle for Çanakkale.”

The most important aspect of the 24 May 1915 Armistice, signed after nine hours of discussion, was that there was no longer hatred towards Turks on the Anzac side. They had used propaganda against Turks and portrayed the Turks as fierce and cowardly brutes. But the close interaction during the war showed that the Turks were decent and of fine character.

When the Anzac soldiers were given gas masks, they refused to wear them saying “Turks are decent people, and will not use poisonous gas.” While the battle was raging there was a mutual sympathy among soldiers of both sides. Once a staff officer saw Turks freely wandering around Australian soldiers and asked: “Why don’t you fire?” As a response they said: “They do no harm to us, let them wander as they want.”

Between the entrenchments, presents were being exchanged. Turks were throwing candy, grapes and the like, while the allied soldiers were giving cigarettes and canned food.


12. General Charles V. F. Tawshend’s views about Turks
“Commanding the 6th division in Iraq during WW1, General Tawshend, after a quick advance on Selmanı Pak, was defeated by the Turkish forces and retreated to the South, Kütulammare. Finally they surrendered to Halil Pasha.

“Halil Pasha came to me. I wanted to surrender my sword and revolver to him but he did not accept them saying ‘They are yours.’ He said I would be a respectable guest for them.”

“Enver Pasha treated me the same way. I was welcomed by the officers of the 1st Army Headquarters in Istanbul on 3 June 1916 at 5.30 p.m. I was surprised to be treated so as a captive. I was taken to a house arranged for me with assigned Navy Captain Tevfik Bey. All expenses were paid by the Ottoman government and I could freely go about Istanbul.”

“What the Irish Question is to the British is what the Armenian Question is to the Turks. The Armenians helped the Russians and the British in every possible way and worked for Türkiye’s loss.”


13. David Hotham’s Views about Turks
English author David Hotham served as Times correspondent in Türkiye for eight years. He was sent to Germany in 1966. Short paragraphs from his book are as follows:

“In our age, the only nation to step to a higher civilization is the Turkish nation. Turks were once Asian; now they are Europeans. They want to be an absolute and perpetual part of Europe.”

“Then the Turks were admitted to NATO and other Western organizations; but in this the Cold War had a great impact. The Americans wanted Turkish support since they were so manly and courageous. Istanbul and the straits were under Turkish control. In case of a war with Soviet Russia, the Anatolian Peninsula would become a very strategic place. So, the Turks Were admitted to the European Community for military reasons.”

There is a significant difference between nations, who had always been externalized from Europe, and Turks. While others tried to imitate Western Civilization, Turks directly wanted to be Western.

“Türkiye underwent various phases of westernization in two centuries. But, as I mentioned before, the greatest westerner was Mustafa Kemal, who lived forty years ago. ATATÜRK and his friends aimed to make Türkiye a part of Europe and its civilization. They realized well that the biggest obstacle for integration was religion.”

“The essential principle of Turkish Revolution was in fact laicism. Without knowing what this principle means it is impossible to understand Türkiye. In the west, laicism means the line that separates the authorities of church and state, but in an Islamic country laicism has stricter implications. Because Islam and state have been closely connected Sharia law prevails in every field of life. No other Muslim country chose laicism. For this reason, Türkiye shocked the Islamic world with its attitude… The main objective of laicism in Kemalism was to get rid of bigots and reactionary people. Actually, there is no clergy in Islam. However, there was a clergy like that in Christianity in Türkiye. A primarily conservative class.”

“Turks have a peculiar characteristic of doing unexpected things at critical times, which is worth paying attention to. In the last century they displayed at least three examples of this. In 1919, after the Turks had been officially defeated, they re-started their independence war and turned defeat into victory. In 1945, President İsmet İnönü turned dictatorship into democracy almost overnight. And in 1961, generals who came to power one year before turned the system into parliamentary regime.”

“The Army in Türkiye is the best organized Kemalist power and had a certain character.”

“The Turkish army had highly motivated commanders even at first. A military book written in Kaşgar nine hundred years ago says a Turkish commander has to be so strong as to resist the devil, and must be full of respect and love towards any kind of favour. It also proposes that the four virtues of a commander are honour, generosity, courage, and profound military knowledge. So, in today’s Türkiye, both its personnel and the public view the Turkish army as a source of pride and power.”

“In Türkiye, the army is a part of life more than an element of state. It is a unifying, and civilizing power. Every Turk fulfils his military service if not handicapped. For most Turks this is a very significant stage of training and a right of passage. The Army brings young villagers from remote regions; feeds and dresses them. It teaches them to read and write, it teaches them fine and sends them to the cities as educated people. Most Turks enjoy being a soldier and try to benefit from it.”

“I remember once taking a soldier into my car in Istanbul. He was the son of an easterner. When I asked him what he thought of army service, he replied in a very serious manner saying: “The Army teaches man three things: discipline, benevolence, and civilization.” For an ordinary soldier, this was a remarkable reply. Moreover, the Turkish soldier does his military service under difficult conditions and strict discipline.”

“Those who fought against the Turks had a great admiration for them. Old veterans express this fact even today.”

“But under normal circumstances, a Turk is the most polite, helpful, and sincere friend. They do not want to hurt anyone. I was always treated with politeness, benevolence and understanding while I was in Türkiye.”

“During my eight year stay in Türkiye (1958-1966) not even a single Turk warned me in a threatening way. They always behaved friendly.”

“Turks have an interesting attitude towards money. Turks understand the importance of money like everybody else. But they have an extraordinary disregard for money. On my first visit to Ankara, I went all around Ankara in a cab. But at the end of the day, I realized I did not have enough money to pay the round. The driver (who saw me for the first time in his life), dispelled all my worries with a few nice words. Swinging his hands freely, he said, ‘Never mind, forget about it, you can pay some other day. He even did not ask my name and address. I myself gave them. But he came only one week later to get his money.’ ”

“The same is true for shopping. Enter any store in your neighborhood and suppose that you suddenly realize that you forget your wallet. The owner of the store gives you the things you want even you cannot pay at that moment because he is sure that you will not cheat on him and you will pay your debt. For Turks trust is very important. If you express a feeling of distrust to a Turk, he feels very sorry.”

“The traditional attitude of Turks about regarding money as despicable may come from their national pride. Note that Turks have a very strong empire past.”

“These days in daily life women play important roles. In parliament, universities, as writers and journalists there are a large number of women. Indeed, although it has only been recently applied in Britain there are a large number of women judges in Türkiye. Turkish women prove their achievements in art, too. There are master actresses, ballerinas and musicians among Turkish women.”

“The Turks believe that the Armenians are a betraying minority. They cooperated with Türkiye's enemies and collaborated with Russia to establish a separate Armenian state. For betraying their country with war and stabbing it in the back when Türkiye was faced by a national threat, the Armenians deserve their lot.”

“As Aubrey Herbert stated: Although the Armenians had an open road for developing Türkiye, they were deceived by Europe and driven to suicide.”


“ATATÜRK was the first Turkish leader who understood that the Turks should isolate themselves from the Islamic world for real westernization. So, with a logical extremism he established a secular state, which was unprecedented for a Muslim country. Thus, he set the conditions for adapting Türkiye to the Western world.”

ATATÜRK’S objective was to elevate Türkiye to the “level of contemporary civilization”. In his life he frequently used this phrase. And today people who follow his vision use it.

“I myself think that the Turks should be in Europe because I believe that they can contribute to Europe in many ways. The Turks know Europe; they have lived on the borders of this continent for centuries. They have slowly digested their civilization there. At least, they can contribute to Europe as much as their close relatives Hungarians and Finns. For the Turks are not a destructive but a creative nation.”



Conclusion
In history, we saw that many writers, thinkers and commanders who lived in Türkiye or had the opportunity to closely know Turks have positive and nice opinions about Turks.

Moreover, these writers warn people who have negative opinions about Turks without knowing them, and state that they are wrong to do so.

Today we see that foreign thinkers who know Türkiye and the Turks well have positive opinions, which makes us happy.

(Ret.) Brig. Gen. Erdal YURDAKUL, Ph. D.

TURKISH MILITARY HISTORY AND MILITARY CULTURE

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION FOR MILITARY HISTORY

N° 87 Ankara - 2007

Gnkur. Askeri Tarih ve Stratejik Etüt Başkanlığı

Türk Askeri Tarih Komisyonu (TATK) Genel Sekreterliği

06100 Bakanlıklar / ANKARA - TÜRKİYE

 "Hattı Müdafaa yoktur, sathı müdafaa vardır. 

Bu satıh bütün vatandır."

Mustafa Kemal ATATÜRK