TURKEY’S COMPASSIONATE REACTION TO HRANT DINK’S MURDER SHATTERS MYTHS ABOUT TURKS
	Ergun KIRLIKOVALI	ergun@turkla.com

The headline could easily be: “Turkish reaction underscores differences in attitudes between Turks and Diaspora Armenians towards hate crimes and/or terrorism”.

Or how about this: “Turks, despite Western misperception, do not hate Armenians”.

Or this: “Turkey proved once more that it is a land of tolerance where many faiths act harmoniously as one in the face of adversity.”

First, let me state in no uncertain terms that we, the members of Turkish-American community, condemn the dastardly murder of Hrant Dink in the strongest possible language; express our deep sorrow and convey our heartfelt condolences to the victim’s family, friends, and, indeed, the entire Turkish nation. We consider those bullets fired on Dink as having been aimed at human rights, freedom of speech, democracy, and unity in Turkey.

ATAA (Assembly Of Turkish American Associations), home of 63 Turkish American Associations across U.S., Canada and Turkey, located in Washington, D.C. USA, condemned the killing of Turkish Armenian journalist, Hrant Dink, in a press release dated January 19, 2007. “ …The killing of Mr. Dink is a great loss to Turkey. Mr. Dink was the editor of Agos, an Armenian-language newspaper in Istanbul, and also wrote for the Turkish daily, Zaman. He was a respected member and voice of Istanbul’s prosperous and growing Armenian community… ATAA reaffirms that people are entitled to their own opinions and the expression of the same. Turks are struggling for the same rights in Europe and America…” said the press release.

I did not know Dink personally and I strongly disagreed with him on his characterization of Turkish-Armenian conflict during WWI.

Dink called it genocide, I know it was not; it was a civil war started by Armenian nationalists.

Dink was compassionate about the Armenian suffering and losses; I am compassionate about both Turkish and Armenian and others’ suffering and losses during the same time period and in the same geography.

Dink ignored or dismissed Armenian treason, revolts, and terrorism; I write about them all the time.

Dink hardly ever mentioned the Ottoman-Armenians who donned the uniforms of the invading Russian and French armies to kill their Ottoman-Muslim neighbors; I stress that forgotten fact in most of my writings.

Dink wanted dialogue and peace; so do I and 70 million Turks. Dink thought dialogue and peace could come from, well, accepting Dink’s views. Whereas I think dialogue and peace can come from “learning about the other side of the story, namely the Turkish side and making room for Turkish suffering and losses (like my grandparents…)

Dink did not dwell upon more than a million Azeri made refugees at gunpoint on their own soil in 1992-1994 by the Armenians; I wrote about this ethnic cleansing campaign waged by Armenia frequently.

Dink did not condemn Armenian aggression in Karabagh and the wholesale massacre of the entire population of Khodjaly on February 19, 1992; I did, many times.

Dink wanted the Turkish-Armenian border opened, as he thought trade would improve relations and increase prosperity in the region. I want Armenia to end military occupation of Azerbaijan first, allow the 1+ million Azeri refugees to return to their homes in Karabagh and western regions of Azerbaijan, and then and only then can the Turkish-Armenian border be opened.

While Dink, and many biased and ill-informed Diaspora Armenians and their allies, wanted Turkey to face her history; I wanted Armenians, and their many western allies, to face their own history along with Turks facing Turkish history.

Dink implied facing history would build a better future; I am saying facing Dink’s idea of history is a bad idea due to falsified and biased nature of Dink’s version of history.

As you can see, while Dink and I agreed on the need for calm dialogue and peace between the Turks and the Armenians, we disagreed on how to get there – and pretty much on everything else.

These differences in opinion, though, are no reason for anyone to be hurt, let alone shot. We should be able to settle our differences by words, not bullets.

At this moment, I can hear some readers saying “Go tell that to the gunman”. Well, I did, with my letters. Turks did it with their outpouring of heartfelt condolences; their numbers – tens of thousands of Muslim Turks walked; and their slogans “We are Armenians today” and “We are Hrant Dink today”. Turkey did with its heart and soul, with immediate public statements of sorrow from top political leaders down to ordinary citizens. The killer’s father actually turned his son in! What more can anyone ask from a nation whose police caught the gunman within 36 hours!

Now let us flip the coin on those who thought “Go tell that to the gunman” and whom I shall call “my sarcastic friends”. In all fairness, how did they react when the Turkish diplomat, Kemal Arikan, about the same age as Dink at the time of death, was assassinated in the same dastardly way as Dink, on January 27, 1982, in Los Angeles? Arikan was also married and he had children. Did “my sarcastic friends” take part in a walk down Wilshire Avenue shouting “We are all Kemal Arikan today” and “We are all Turks today”? Oh, by the way, was there even a protest walk like the one in Turkey hat in the first place? Were there thousands of Americans, of Armenian descent or not, protesting a dastardly hate crime committed in our midst by a brainwashed Armenian teenager – Hampig Sassoonian, the convicted Armenian killer, was 19 years old? Were there determined and massive opposition by Armenians to hate crimes against Turks? Answers are: No, no, no, no, and no…

How about the other two Turkish diplomats gunned down in Santa Barbara in 1973 by a hate-filled Armenian older man? Did anyone protest then? Any walk participated by thousands of Americans condemning hate crimes and terrorism? Any posters? Any catchy slogans? Anything? Answers are: No, no, no, no, and no… Did the French do any protesting or marching or condemning in 1980s when the Armenian terrorists attacked the Orly Airport killing many? Or the Turkish consulate in Marseille or Lyon?

Did the Austrians do any protesting or marching or condemning in 1970s when the Armenian terrorists attacked the Turkish Embassy in Vienna and kill innocent Turks?

in 1970s when the Armenian terrorists attacked the Turkish Embassy in Vienna and kill innocent Turks?

Did the Canadians do any protesting or marching or condemning in 1970s when the Armenian terrorists attacked the Turkish Embassy in Ottawa and kill innocent Turks?

The list goes on and on. When you compare the reaction to hate crimes by nations, you know Turks passed the test of compassion and tolerance with flying colors.

Then there is this. When a 17 year old Turkish kid killed an innocent Armenian writer, the killer’s father immediately turned him over to the police and the Turkish nation from top to bottom condemned the killer. The Turkish assassin and his hate crime were shown zero tolerance by Turks.

When Hampig Sassoonian, the 19 year old Armenian kid who killed and innocent Turkish diplomat, did the killer’s parents turn him over to the LAPD? Of course not! In fact, far from it. Killer was hidden from view in a series of safe places until anonymous tips led to killer’s capture by LAPD. What did the Armenian Diaspora do? Did they protest hate crimes? Condemn terrorism? Of course not! They raised funds for his legal defense. They held religious services, candle light vigils, glorifying a brainwashed, bloodthirsty assassin!

When you compare the two reactions above, you cannot help but be impressed by the strong Turkish rejection of hate crimes and be absolutely disgusted by Armenian Diaspora’s embracing of Armenian terrorism since 1973.

One can argue anything one wants. But the two vastly different (opposite) reactions to hate crimes documented above are irrefutable facts. Namely, one reaction by Turks clearly rejecting a hate crime during January 19-23 2007, another reaction by most in Armenian Diaspora passionately embracing many hate crimes and acts of terrorism since 1973. With your permission, I WISH TO ETCH IN STONE THIS STARK DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TURKS AND THE ARMENIAN DIASPORA ON REACTING TO HATE CRIMES. Even the most biased and virulent anti-Turk should be able to see this big picture and hopefully wake up.

In case you were on a short visit to Mars the last few days, the editor of Agos newspaper published in Istanbul, Turkey, and a prominent member of the Turkish-Armenian community, Hrant Dink, was gunned down. The assassination took place as Dink was leaving the Agos building. According to eyewitnesses, an 18-19 year old man wearing a white hat and blue jean jacket fired four bullets at Dink at close range. Three of those bullets hit Dink in his head and neck killing him on the spot. The killer then ran away on foot. Turkish police arrested two suspects fitting this description a few miles from the crime scene. When the images of the suspect, recorded by the security cameras of the businesses nearby, were broadcast to public, a stunning development occurred. The suspect’s own father turned his son in! His father, a soft spoken man of humble means who lives more than a thousand kilometers away from Istanbul, in the Black Sea coastal city of Trabzon, saw his son’s photo on TV. He did not hesitate one minute to call the police with information on his son. The suspect was captured with this fantastic tip within 36 hours of his crime. Since the suspect is under age, 17 years old, it was thought he had to have acted by support and guidance of others. Further investigation and some great police work resulted in 8 more arrests. Investigation is far from over.

Hrant Dink’s lawyer, Erdal Dogan, stated in a phone interview with NTV anchor right after the shooting, that Dink had alerted the Sisli District Attorney about the threats Dink had received but that Dink had not ask for police protection in the form of perhaps body guards around the clock. Dink had written about the threats he had received in his latest article and described his feelings with the phrase “Dovish skittishness of the state of my soul.”

In a compassionate and sensitive move, the President of Turkey, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, immediately declared the event “ugly and shameful” and condemned it. Prime Minister Erdogan, lost no time to deliver his speech of condolences, where he also condemned the event and called it a move against the unity of Turkey. Turkish Interior Minister Aksu and Justice Minister Cicek flew from Ankara to Istanbul to evaluate the developments at the crime scene as soon as they heard the assassination. Statements of shock and sadness form all media personalities, industry leaders, ordinary citizens kept pouring in. Grieving Turks, Muslims, Christians, and Jews alike, created huge crowds at the crime scene and shouted slogans condemning killer(s). As one can clearly see, Turkey from its highest levels of government to it widest base of citizenry sincerely condemned this assassination and mobilized swiftly for the immediate capture of the perpetrator(s).

Even after all this sincere and honest outpouring of sympathies by the Turkish people, turning over to the police of the killer by his father, arrest of the killer and 8 other suspects all within 36 hours of the crime committed, and public statements by the president and prime minister of Turkey, and much more, some in Armenian Diaspora still could not help themselves attack, insult, and demonize Turkey. Some fanatic Armenian groups circulated press releases with a headline “Turkey killed Hrant Dink.” Do you now understand why we cannot enter a thoughtful discussion with these radical Armenian lobbyists? Look how warped and sick their take is on a single event! Now multiply this by hundreds of thousands of times and you will arrive at the “alleged” genocide wrap with which the Turks are unfairly burdened. This is why we, Turks, Turkish-Americans, and Turkish Diaspora, cannot, and will not, see eye to eye with Armenian Diaspora. Armenian Diaspora lie a lot, misrepresent and falsify even more, and when neither work, then they fabricate, in the true spirit of Andonian, the master faker.

I hope that the U.S. Congress wakes up to this hateful agenda of the Armenian Diaspora soon enough and reject the baseless Armenian allegations of genocide when it comes up for a vote. I sincerely hope so. Otherwise the Turkish-American relations would be seriously and permanently damaged if the US Congress recognizes Armenian claims as settled history. It would be a grave mistake to think that Turkish pride and honor can be fodder to America’s arrogant and ignorant local politics.

I hope also that the French government does not send that ill-intentioned anti-Turkish law banning the freedom of speech on Turkish-Armenian conflict, the infamous denial law, to the Senate where it is expected to pass. If that happens, I am writing here in black and white, France can kiss Turkey goodbye for decades if not longer. A huge black hole would sit right in the middle of world maps in France and the French would need rather long legs to jump from the Balkans to the Middle East or North Africa to Caucasus and Turkic Central Asia. These are not simply idle threats as I am in no position to speak for the Turkish government or the Turkish people. But I do keep my finger on the pulse of the Turkish nation to the best of my ability. And I do know Turks value their honor and dignity more than the French value the ever shrinking reach of their political influence.

I wish to remind France that she still owes an apology to Turks for invading Anatolia during WWI, raining death and destruction on Turks, and destroying thousand year of peaceful-cohabitation of Turks and Armenians in Anatolia by using neighbor-against-neighbor approach. With this law, French politicians would be adding insult to the historic pain and suffering they inflicted on Turks. Since the French parliament now appears to be in the business of history, perhaps the French care to face their history with Algerians in 1950s and 1960s. Then they can look at French persecution of Africans, Asians, and others.

Turkish views on the Turkish-Armenian conflict are already mostly censored by large American dailies like NYT, LAT, Boston Globe, and others, under the pretext that “they do not conform to the consensus.” Expect this “hidden embargo on Turkish views” or “secret censorship” to pick up speed after the Dink murder.

The translation of this kind of censorship is the trampling of one’s freedom of speech if one’s speech challenges the conventional wisdom. There is a lawsuit going on in Boston where ATAA along with non-Turkish American teachers and students challenge the department of education’s decision to censor out responsible opposing Turkish views regarding the alleged Armenian Genocide from suggested reading materials.

In March of 2006, two retired Turkish ambassadors were scheduled to give a seminar on Turkish views at USC which was abruptly cancelled at the last moment when the Armenian community applied pressure laced with veiled threats on organizers at USC.

In May 2006, an Armenian professor guest lecturer’s blatantly propagandistic views were presented to students At El Camino College as settled history, despite strenuous objections by the Turkish-Americans present.

For years, LAT and NYT kept printing editorial after op-ed after news article every April, some simply paraphrasing Armenian claims demonizing Turkey, rarely printed Turkish-Americans’ rebuttals, if at all. Frustrated by this censorship, more than 300 Turkish intellectuals signed a statement in April of 2001 presenting their views which the NYT refused to publish even as a paid statement on grounds that “It was against the generally accepted norms and conventional wisdom.”

GNP (an arm of LAT published in Armenian dominated Glendale) even sent a pre-emptive message to this Turkish-American writer that his letters would no longer be published so he need not bother writing them.

Every April, PBS stations would air partisan documentaries produced by Armenian and/or pro-Armenian filmmakers despite ever increasing chorus of Turkish-Americans requesting equal time to respond to unproven allegations in them.

Holocaust museums that are supposed to foster tolerance in America yield under the Armenian pressure and invite only Armenian speakers carefully designed events to define the Turkish-Armenian conflict with zero input about the other side of the story.

There are many more such examples of prejudice censorship which paint a different picture about the practice of free speech in America. The message by these unfortunate partisan acts, heard loud and clear, time and again, is that if your speech opposes generally accepted norms, challenges conventional wisdom, and questions consensus, then it will be censored. If this means speech is curtailed, so be it. And the messengers, mainly opinion makers in media, academia, politics, and elsewhere, seem to have no qualms about trampling upon the free speech rights of Americans, mainly of Turkish descent but others too, which can only point to their anti-Turkish and/or anti-Muslim prejudice and blatant bigotry.