Türk Siyaseti ve Türkiye Siyasi Tarihi - Video Projesi - Türk ve İslam Tarihi - Türk Dna'sı

Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

eupedia denilen Türk Düşmanı Pkk Destekleyicisi sitede açık açık Türk düşmanlığı yapılıyor

Burada Ön Türk Tarihi hakkında konular bulabilirsiniz

Re: Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 05 Tem 2015, 16:43

Witness yazdı:Baya kafa yormuşsun bu sonuçlara varmak için anlaşılan ama olmamış, yine olmamış. Kemal Paşa'dır çünkü gerçek ismi öyledir, daha doğrusu o şekilde tanınır. Atatürk, TBMM tarafından, tamamını kendisinin seçtiği vekiller tarafından kendisine verilen soyismidir. Her bir Türk'e sorulmadı kendisini Ata, Ulu Önder olarak kabul edip etmediği. Ben konuda fikirlerimi açıkça yazdım, dünyadaki her devlet başkanı gibi kendiside belirli bir saygıyı hak ediyor. O kadar. Atam değil, Ulu Önderim değil ve sevmiyorumda. Nefret ettiğim anlamına gelmiyor ve nefret etmiyorum. Sadece farklı yolun yolcusuyuz, kendisi ileri derecede din karşıtı biriydi ve faaliyetleri bu doğrultuda oldu ve böyle olan herhangibirini sevemeyeceğim gibi onuda sevmiyorum. Örneğin Arnavut Enver Hoca gibi. Sen bunu düşmanlık olarak algılamak istiyorsan, keyfin bilir. Öyle zannetmeye devam edebilirsin.


Sana bir tavsiyem var, kabul et, sen ve senin gibiler Vahdettin gibi İngiliz ajanlarının hayranlarısınız, siz Atatürk'e en ufak bir saygı duyacağınıza Irak'ta 1,5 milyon Müslüman'a soykırım uygulayan İngiliz ve Amerikanların kölesi ve mandası olmaktan onur duyan sapkın insanlarsınız. Osmanlı ve Atatürk'ü karşı karşı getirmek te ayrıca bir başka bir sapkınlıktır. Osmanlı Hanedanı'nın iyi dönemleri var, kötü dönemleri var, bunu Atatürk'te kabul ediyordu. En basit örnek ise Vahdettin örneği, günümüzde ABD'nin bizim mal kafalı insanlarımıza kabul ettirmek istediği Osmanlıcılık, Vahdettin'in Osmanlı döneminin ilkeleridir, yoksa ABD asla büyük kahramanımız ve Atamız Fatih Sultan Mehmet'in ilkelerini bizlere aşılamaya çalışmaz, ama maalesef içimizdeki yobaz kafalılar bunları idrak edecek kadar bir zekaya sahip değillerdir.

Atatürk'ün adı Kemal Paşa değildi, böyle bir terimi ancak Atatürk düşmanı yabancı ingiliz kafalılar kullanırlar. İyi niyetli olarak başka bir terim kullanacaksan, "Mustafa Kemal Paşa" yada "Mustafa Kemal" terimlerini kullanırsın, çünkü bunlar Atamıza askeri görevleri sırasında hitap edilen terimlerdir. Ama gerçek Türkler Atatürk'ü Ata'sı olarak kabul ettiği için "ATATÜRK" terimini tercih ederler, tarihi hadiselerden(Kurtuluş Savaşı ve öncesi) bahsedildiği zamanda "Mustafa Kemal Paşa" yada "Mustafa Kemal" terimleri kullanılabilir. Ama senin gibi "Kemal Paşa terimini saygısızlık yapmak amacıyla kullanan", "bilim dışı Türk, Turkic ayırımları yapan", "Azerbaycan Türkleri yerine kasıtlı bir şekilde Azeri terimini kullanan" insanların neleri amaçladığınız çok açık bir şekilde deşifre olmaktadır.

Atatürk bir "Hafız"dı, bu terimin ne anlama geldiğini bilen insanlar Atatürk'ün ne kadar bilimsel düşünen zeki bir Müslüman olduğunu anlarlar. Atatürk'ün bir tane "din karşıtı" diye adlandırdığınız bir faaliyetini(tarihi belgeleriyle) bile dahi gösteremezsiniz. Ayrıca gerçek İslam Dini Emevi Dini ile asla eşdeğer değildir, bu "Emevi Dini" terimini araştırmanızı tavsiye ediyorum, belki aydınlanırsınız.

Ayrıca, Atatürk'ün atalarının yani kökeninin ayrıntılarını bilemiyecek kadar cahil yada bilipte bunu bilinçli olarak fitne fesat amaçlarla gözardı edecek kadar kötü niyetlisiniz. Atatürk, Makedonya'nın Oğuz Türklerindendir. Dedeleri Fatih Sultan Mehmet'in Balkan Fetihleri sırasında Balkanlara yerleşen Yörük Türkmenlerdendir. Atatürk'ün Baba Tarafının aşireti "Kızıl Oğuz Kocacık" boyundandır.
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Re: Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 05 Tem 2015, 17:52

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:Kiddo, entire cities were wiped off the map from where Tamerlanes' troops crossed, and you doubt the veracity of the claims?


In your previous post you claimed Timur to have killed 17 million people, now you lower the number to between 100,000 and 200,000. What will the number in your next post consist of? Maybe 1000? And you still did not mention the source name of the historical ancient book in which the numbers of 17 millions or even 40 millions is mentioned. This shows, that you are a simple liar, and shows how weak and unreliable your arguments are. :) You can not decorate, beautify or garnish your lies with the copy pasting of some large graphical images, it does not mean anything at all.

You dont know the meaning of the term "Genocide". Go see a doctor, and get yourself medicated for your denial problems. If "War" was equal to "Genocide", then all the killings during the historical wars were "Genocide". This is not true. "Genocide", means this, let me tell it to you piece by piece, maybe you will enlighten yourself, or else go see a doctor. Genocide, is a procedure used to a specific foreign nation. In fact, "Timur" was of "Turk" origin, and he also attacked and made "War" with the Ottoman Army(also of Turk origin) too. Many Turks died at the War between the Ottomans and the Timurids, but this has nothing to do with "Genocide", this is "WAR". "Genocide" is when a "State" will have a goal to on purposely "DESTROY" all other foreign ethnic groups within the "borders" of a state. But a war declared to the official army of another state is NOT GENOCIDE. Conquering is also NOT GENOCIDE. But, after the conquering(after the finish of the war with an official army), if a state on purposely kills the innocent defenseless civil people(non military) just because they are of another nation, this is GENOCIDE and an UNHUMAN RACIST action. This has never been the case for all Turks in the history.

War and conquest has nothing to do with genocide. During a war between soldiers, genocide is not possible. Everywhere, were the Ghengisid armies went, they offered peace if they surrendered, and all historical facts show really that if the countries accepted the offer, their countries lived in peace under the Genghisid(=Timurid) rule. A genocide is a legal term describing the killing of innocent civil(no military) people(based on ethnical hate crime) that cant defend theirselves. During Genghisid rule, this never happened, after conquest like you can see for example during the rule of Kubilai Khan, you can see that a foreign Marco Polo became one of the most richest statesmen in the empire of Kubilai Khan. The only mistake the Turk royal families made in history is eating of each other(their own people) for the fight for the throne.

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:Anyway, The U.S. of A. didn't kill 1.5 million of innocent civilians. Those Muzzie "innocent civilians" are killing each other mercilessly not only in Iraq but all over the Muslim world.


Tell me something, in the Ottoman period before the loss in 1918, did the Ottomans ever kill 1.5 million innocent civilians, to make theirselves and their elite companies richer? No, never. Just after the British and American rule in Iraq started, a genocide of millions were conducted, is this a coincidence? Why werent the Muslims killing each other during the Ottoman period? We should know the fact that no one in Iraq is killing each other. There are thousands, maybe tens of thousands of CIA controlled sleeper cells, and dozens of subgroups of larger CIA controlled terrorist organizations like the PKK, which on purposely are causing the CHAOS in Iraq. All these CIA sleeper cells and the CIA terrorist organizations are being commanded by the US army special forces like Delta Force. In fact, the majority of these sleeper cells and terrorists are sneaky US, UK, Israeli and Armenian originated soldiers. All these US genocide structures i mentioned just now are based on secret organizations, and we should not forget the obvious officially publicly killings of the US army which were leaked to the international media.

For example look at this horrifiying unhuman acts of the US soldiers in the leaked pictures of the Abu Ghraib Genocide:

Ebu Gureyb Soykırımı - The Abu Ghraib Genocide

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

[QUOTE=http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=12311]Our Lesson: Chaos, Our Teacher: USA

Dersimiz: Kaos Öğretmenimiz: ABD

Rafet Ballı

İki soruyla başlayalım.
Bir: Suriyeli Sünniler Esad’a neden isyan etmedi?
İki: Türkiye’de PKK’nın kitlesel desteğiyle ilgili.
“Kobani” eylemlerine halk katılımı neden cılız?
Cevap: ABD sayesinde!
***
Açalım: Bölgemiz bir yıkım süreci yaşıyor.
Süreç: ABD’nin 2003’te Irak’ı işgaliyle başladı.
Baas eksenli devlet çökertildi.
Sonuç: Ağır bilançolu bir kaos. Yıkılmış bir ülke. Yaklaşık 1.5 milyon ölüm.
2.2 milyon mülteci: Suriye’ye 1.5 milyon. Ürdün’e 700 bin.

***
Irak’ta yeni bir devlet kurdular.
ABD imalatı anayasal sistemin iki özelliği vardı.
Bir: Zayıf bir merkezi devlet.
İki: Etnik ve mezhep temelli bölünmenin kurumsallaştırılması.
“Ek” yerlerinden kolay parçalansın diye.
***
Irak’taki siyasal süreç ABD’yi yanıltmadı!
Bağdat: Irak’ı tekrar birleştirmeye çalışıyor.
Cevap: Etnik ve mezhepçi kuvvetlerden geliyor.
Aylık ortalama can kaybı: 800-1000 kişiydi.
IŞİD’le birlikte: Kaos derinleşti, kitlesel kayıplar başladı.
***
ABD “kaos” dersi verdi. Irak halkı da sonuçlar çıkardı.
Bir: ABD “demokrasi” diyor. Önce devleti çökertiyor. Ayrılıkların önünü açıyor.
İki: Devlet çökünce altında halk kalıyor. Yıkıma yardım edenler de dahil.
***
Bu tespitler, gazeteci temennileri değil.
Irak sahasındaki olgulara bakalım.
Eski Başbakan Nuri Maliki: Irak’ı birleştirmeye çalıştı.
ABD ve dostları “mezhepçi”likle suçladı onu.
Daha yeni seçim yapıldı: Maliki birinci kuvvet çıktı.
Sünni kesimden aldığı oylar sayesinde.
Halk devletsizlik ve bölünme dersini iyi öğrenmişti.
***
Tanınmış bir Kürt milliyetçisiyle konuştum. Türkiye kökenli.
Barzani hayranıydı. Kahrederek Erbil’den Almanya’ya döndü tekrar.
Anlattığı: “Yaşlı kuşaklar Saddam dönemi daha iyiydi diyor.”
Bu tespiti başkalarından da duydum.
* * *
Suriye halkı da önce Irak’a baktı. Sonra Suriye’ye sığınan Iraklı mültecilere.
Gördüğü: Yıkım, dilencilik, fahi.elik... Bir halk düşürülmüştü.
Ardından: Suriye’ye saldırtılan milisler çıktı ortaya. Batı destekli.
Bayraklarında güya “demokrasi” yazıyordu.
Hedefleri: Devleti çökertmek.
Suriye halkı da “kaos” dersini iyi öğrendi. Çetelere yüz vermedi.
Ama yine de bedel ödüyor: 200 bin can kaybı. 4 milyonu yurt dışına, 9 milyon göçmen.
***
Aynı tecrübeyi Türkiye’de yaşıyoruz.
1.5 milyon Suriyeli mülteci. 200 bini kamplarda. Gerisi Türkiye’ye saçıldı.
Sokakta, köprü altlarında tutunmaya çalışanlar var.
Maalesef: Suriyeli dilenci her yerde. Fahi.elik yaygın.
***
Sonuç:
Bir: İç çatışma, kaos, parçalanma ve devletsizlik sadece felaket üretiyor.
Bölge halkları olarak kaos dersini iyi kavramaya başladık.
İki: Türkiye’deki Suriyeli mültecilerin 500 bin kadarı Kürt asıllı.
Gördüler: Irak’ta peşmergenin, Suriye’de PKK/PYD’nin düzen kurma kapasitesi yok.
Üç: Bu yüzden Kürt halkı kaosçulardan uzaklaşıyor. PKK seçmen kitlesini sokağa çıkaramıyor.

Rafet Ballı
ulusalkanal.com.tr

http://www.ulusalkanal.com.tr/dersimiz- ... ,3401.html[/QUOTE]






Petros Houhoulis yazdı:bla bla bla


Abu Ghraib Genocide - Part 2:

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim




Petros Houhoulis yazdı:bla bla bla


Abu Ghraib Genocide - Part 3:

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Re: Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 05 Tem 2015, 18:55

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:In other words, if Perincek suggested that the Ottomans didn't use pistols for executing Armenians, he would be guilty, but hey! He didn't deny that! He said that since there are still some Armenians who are alive, it's not a genocide!!!
It's legalese, but you can't hide over the hecatombes of the massacred Armenians. All you can do is deny there was a genocide simply because at 1915 there was no ICJ or any other authority or international body, not even the Society of Nations, to take upon the case. In contrast, the Holocaust which took place a generation later was established simply because the legal bodies to do so were created right after WWII. The same with Tamerlane: There were no international courts during the 15th century, thus - strictly legally - he didn't commit any genocide!!!


Repeat Number One for Bad Intended Mentally Ill Turk Hating Denial Stress Problems Having People:

We Turks did not commit any genocide. Armenians betrayed the Turks and Kurds with whom they were neighbours for thousand years. It was the 1st World War, and the Ottoman Army was battling against the English, French and Russian allies. During this time of war, the Armenians did not fight for their homeland(the Ottoman Empire in which they were living), in stead in a treacherously way, they betrayed the Turks. While the majority of Turkish and Kurdish men were in duty of the Ottoman Army, Armenian terrorists openly joined the side of the English, French and Russian army.

They killed innocent woman and children in villages were there were few men left, because most of the men joined the Ottoman Army. The Armenian terrorists destroyed complete cities like Van and Erzurum. Much worse, they wore the uniforms of the Russian and French Army. While the Ottoman Army was busy with the 1st WW, the Armenian and Greek traitors stabbed the Ottoman population in the back. What the Ottoman State did was even humanly, look at what the Russian and US puppet Armenians did in Khocali? The Ottoman State only deported the traitors that stabbed the Ottoman state in the back. This has nothing to do with genocide.

The Armenians tried to divide and weaken the Ottoman state from the inner side to make their owners(the English and the Tsar Russians), and the Armenians and their masters were the ones that committed a Muslim Genocide during the 1st WW, the Turks only defended their country, during war, if the enemy tries to kill you, you have to defend your country, this is what we Turks did, the English and their Greek and Armenian puppets tried to kill us and take over our country, and we did not let this happen, and had a victory against them after the Turk War of Independence.

Also, there are thousands of documents in the Russian and US Archives, which shows the exact numbers of Armenians whom were deported to Syria(also Ottoman region at that time), and from here to the US and other countries. The numbers show that there is NO KIND OF A GENOCIDE, the population number of the people safely deported is the same as the number of Armenians that lived in Ottoman country before the 1st World War.

Of course, every human that dies, we should be upset about it, but this was a World War, and if you try to take over the country of the weakened dumb Ottoman dynasty, then the Turks will not surrender, and will defend their country, and that is what we did successfully! End of the Point!

Repeat Number Two for Bad Intended Mentally Ill Turk Hating Denial Stress Problems Having People:

Most important examples are the cities Erzurum and Van, the Armenians committed a genocide on the Muslim Turks and Kurds just to fullfill the orders of their Tsar Russian and English masters. The same unhuman situations were performed in all regions of Türkiye.

I really want you to understand what i mean in a good intended way. Think of it like this:

-There is a First World War ongoing.

-Majority of all Muslim men in Ottoman Türkiye did join the Ottoman army to fight against the Tsar Russians and British.

-The villages are left only with women, old people and children.

-Then all the sudden, Armenian terrorist groups like Hinchaks ve Tashnaks whom wore the military uniforms of the Russians, French and British, and were publicly in the service of the Russians, French and British armies, killed and raped the innocent civil(not soldiers) Turks and Kurds and burn and destroy as much as villages as possible(Van and Erzurum completely) with whom they lived together for 1000 years in peace.

-This is treason, and this treason is performed while the majority of the men were fighting in the battle fields against the real enemy armies of the British and Russians and their puppets(like French, Italian, etc.).

-The head of the state of the Ottoman Empire did not give any kind of order to massacre the Armenians that committed treason. The Ottoman Army was stabbed in the back, while the Ottoman Army was fighting in war, at the civil regions Armenians were commiting treason. The Ottoman state decided only to deport the Armenian population from "Türkiye"(Anatolia) regions to the region of Syria which was then still under control of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman State(The Turks) DID NOT in any kind of way perform any kind of massacre or genocide against the Armenians. Use your logical instincts, if an Armenian group of terrorists kills many of the relatives of a Turk who was in duty in the Ottoman Army, what would a Turk have to do to defend the remaining members of his family in his village? The fact is that the Armenians wore Russian and English military uniforms and tried to take over our country with the performing of hundreds of unhuman campaigns, and we Turks DEFENDED OUR COUNTRY, OUR FAMILIES AND OUR HONOUR SUCCESSFULLY, this is NOT GENOCIDE, this is a WAR, and the Turks were the ones being invaded. Of course, many unfortunate situations, revenge killings have happened, but if you look at the Ottoman records, you can see easily that the Ottoman State, executed(sentenced to death) dozens/hundreds of Turks/Kurds whom murdered against the law.

-Reading the following Report of Hovhannes Kajaznuni, the first Prime Minister of the First Republic of Armenia, shows that all my arguments above are completely true:

http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12301 yazdı:CONGRESS REPORT TO THE TASHNAK PARTY

Hovhannes Kajaznuni, or Hovhannes Katchaznouni (Armenian: Յովհաննէս Քաջազնունի) (1 February 1868 – 1938) was the first Prime Minister of the First Republic of Armenia from May 30, 1918 to May 28, 1919. He was a member of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation.

Hovhannes Kajaznuni, has submitted a report to the Congress of the Tashnaksütyun Party which was held in 1923 in Bucharest-Romania. In this report, Hovhannes Kajaznuni bravely tells the truth about what happened during and after the First World War.

The Summary of the Report of Hovhannes Kajaznuni is like this:

"The Tsar Russia, England and France DECEIVED us Armenians. They told us that they would give us a state reaching from a sea to another sea, and hereby they armed us(gave us weapons) and send us to the fire(to risk ourselves, to die for them, to kill innocent people for them, for what they promised us).

The Turks acted in the pupose of defending. Mutual massacres happened. We massacred the Muslim population. Guiltiness(The ones that did wrong) should not be sought outside of the Dashnak Party. In this case, htere is nothing left to do for the Dashnak Pary. The Dashnak Pary should dissolve itself.
"
The remaining other Armenian statesmen did also write reports like this.


-Also, looking at the Turk Genocide in 26 February 1992, which was committed by the Armenians against the Azerbaijani Turks in the Khocali region, we can CONCLUDE, finally that we TURKS DID NEVER COMMIT ANY KIND OF GENOCIDE. The Armenians murdered in any kind of horrifying unhuman way within only one day, hundreds of innocent Azerbaijani Turks who did not have the proper weapons to defend theirselves. Please have a look at the following pictures to understand what kind of horrifying massacres/genocides the Armenians committed to us Turks in 1992 and understand that the same kind of unhuman acts(massacres/genocides) were also performed during and before the World War 1(1914-1918) against the Türkiye Turks in the Anatolia region.

http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12279 yazdı:Resim

Resim

Resim

More photos of this horrifying unhuman Khocali Genocide can be seen at: http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12279


Repeat Number Three for Bad Intended Mentally Ill Turk Hating Denial Stress Problems Having People:

Do i have to keep repeating the same message, this is what the Court said:

-The Court took the view that the term “genocide” as used in the relevant Article of the Swiss Criminal Code was likely to raise doubts as to the precision required by Article 10 § 2 of the Convention.

-The Court pointed out that it was not called upon to address either the veracity of the massacres and deportations perpetrated against the Armenian people by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 onwards, or the appropriateness of legally characterising those acts as “genocide”, within the meaning of the relevant Article of the Criminal Code.

-In this connection, the Court clearly distinguished the present case from those concerning the negation of the crimes of the Holocaust.

Another new quotation from the official pdf the Court published:

The Court also pointed out that it was not called upon to rule on the legal characterisation of the Armenian genocide. The existence of a “genocide”, which was a precisely defined legal concept, was not easy to prove. The Court doubted that there could be a general consensus as to events such as those at issue, given that historical research was by definition open to discussion and a matter of debate, without necessarily giving rise to final conclusions or to the assertion of objective and absolute truths.

If you still keep on further with your denial problems, go see some doctor and medicate yourself, i am not your doctor :)

Another quotation:

The applicant, Doğu Perinçek, is a Turkish national who was born in 1942 and lives in Ankara (Turkey). Being a doctor of laws and the Chairman of the Turkish Workers’ Party, Mr Perinçek participated in various conferences in Switzerland in May, July and September 2005, during which he publicly denied that the Ottoman Empire had perpetrated the crime of genocide against the Armenian people in 1915 and the following years. He described the idea of an Armenian genocide as an “international lie”.

The Cassation Division emphasised that Mr Perinçek had only denied the characterisation as genocide without calling into question the existence of the massacres and deportations of Armenians.

Agreeing with Mr Perinçek, the Court took the view that the notion of “genocide” was a precisely defined legal concept. According to the case-law of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, for the crime of genocide to be made out, the acts must have been perpetrated with intent to destroy not only certain members of a particular group but all or part of the group itself. Genocide was a very narrow legal concept that was, moreover, difficult to substantiate. The Court was not convinced that the general consensus to which the courts referred in convicting Mr Perinçek could relate to such very specific points of law.


In this connection, the Court clearly distinguished the present case from those concerning the negation of the crimes of the Holocaust. In those cases, the applicants had denied the historical facts even though they were sometimes very concrete, such as the existence of the gas chambers. They had denied the crimes perpetrated by the Nazi regime for which there had been a clear legal basis. Lastly, the acts that they had called into question had been found by an international court to be clearly established.

Lets analyze the following statement:

"it was not called upon to address either the veracity of the massacres and deportations perpetrated against the Armenian people by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 onwards, or the appropriateness of legally characterising those acts as “genocide”
"

Synonyms:

It was not called upon to address: It was Not Correct to Define
Veracity: Truthfulness, Conformity to facts; Accuracy
Appropriateness: Rightness

Full Translation:

1a- It was not called upon to address the veracity of the massacres and deportations. =
1b- It was Not Correct to Define the Accuracy of the massacres and deportations =
1c- The massacres and deportations described in the Swiss criminal code are not Accurate.

2a- It was not called upon to address the appropriateness of legally characterising the massacres and deportations as “genocide” =
2b- It was Not Correct to Define the Rightness of the legally characterising of the massacres and deportations as “genocide” =
2c- The massacres and deportations WERE NOT GENOCIDE.

Different example about the term "called upon to address":

New Scottish Government called upon to address Equal Marriage for same sex couples

The Equality and Human Rights Commission Scotland today launched a new report calling for access to equal marriage for same sex couples in Scotland. The report is a result of a symposium recently held by the Commission to investigate perceived barriers to equal marriage and suggest ways forward for legislators.

The report calls upon the Scottish Government to consider these disparities and to take steps to bring about equal access to marriage in Scotland. The evidence and research contained within the report aims to inform their deliberations.

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/abou ... ex-couples
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Re: Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 06 Tem 2015, 15:36

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showth ... asty/page4

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:All of those J people were farmers who reached Central Asia from Mesopotamia. They were Turkified there, but they were not originally Turkish.


First of all, you are free to perform your stress denial procedure until you die, BUT the fact is that you do not make sense. If you want, i can repeat the facts millions of times, and you can keep denying the truth, i have all the time :)

Now lets continue with the facts, lets analyze the ancient dna results regarding Y-haplogroup J.

-2.800 years ago(800 BCE - 100 AD), Y-haplogroup J was found among the Sakha/Scyhtian Turks during the Iron Age Period in the Altai Republic.

-3.270 years ago(1270 - 1100 BCE), Y-haplogroup J was found among the Late Bronze Age, Kyjatice Culture in Hungary.

-7.000 years ago(5000-3400 BC), Y-haplogroup J was found among the Neolithic Age, Lengyel and Sopot Cultures in Hungary and Croatia.

How could a haplogroup found among the 2.800-7.000 years old skeletal remains from the Altai Region until the Hungarian, Croatian regions be specifically only related with Mezopotamia, only the brains of a stupid person would believe this. In fact, the Sumerians were Proto Turks who migrated from Central Asia(including Altai regions) to Mezopotamia.

Hahaha, i only laugh at your arguments, eupedia which is a PKK terrorist organization supporting forum, is a very academic source, ISNT IT(being sarcastic if you did not get it :) )?

The Homeland of the Turks is the Altai Region and all other Central Asian regions. The ancient Sakha, Huns and Turks are the same people, and their headquarters, the regions were the Core of the Sakha, Huns and Turks lived were the regions located at the Western Eurasian parts beginning from West Mongolia. Central-North-South-East Mongolia, China and further east is the headquarters of people with East Eurasian origin, which is equal to the minority of the ancient Sakha, Huns and Turks.
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Re: Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 06 Tem 2015, 15:45

Atatürk Was of Pure Oghuz Türk Origin

Atatürk'ün Soyu, Kızıl Oğuz(Kocacık) ve Konyar Türkmenleri

http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=881 yazdı:KIZIL OĞUZ YAHUT KOCACIK YÖRÜĞÜ OLARAK ATATÜRK'ÜN BABA AİLESİ

Atatürk'ün soyu ile ilgili elimizdeki en sağlam bilgiler öncelikle kendisinin, annesinin, kardeşi Makbule Hanım'ın anlattıklarıdır. İkinci olarak, kendisini ve ailesini tanıyan Hacı Mehmet Somer gibi, kimi çocukluk arkadaşlarının verdiği bilgilerdir.

Mustafa Kemal dahil aile fertlerinde kuvvetli bir "Yörük, Türkmen olma" bilinci vardır: Makbule Hanım, E. B. Şapolyo'nun sorduğu "babanız nerelidir?" sorusuna şu cevabı vermiştir:

"Babam Ali Rıza Efendi yerli olarak Selaniklidir. Kendileri Yörük sülalesindendir. Annem her zaman Yörük olmakla iftihar ederdi. Bir gün Atatürk'e 'Yörük nedir?' diye sordum. Ağabeyim de bana 'Yürüyen Türkler' dedi." Yine Şapolyo'nun Ruşen Eşref Ünaydın'dan naklettiğine göre, "Atatürk, çok kere benim atalarım Anadolu'dan Rumeli'ye gelmiş Yörük Türkmenlerdendir derlerdi."

Atatürk'ün baba soyu ile ilgili önemli bilgileri verenlerden birisi de M. Kemal'in Selanik'te mahalle ve okul arkadaşı, eski Milletvekillerinden Hacı Mehmet Somer Bey'dir.

Somer'e göre; "Atatürk'ün ataları hakkında benim bildiğim şunlar:

Atatürk'ün ataları Anadolu'dan gelerek Manastır Vilayeti'nin Debre-i Bala Sancağı'na bağlı Kocacık nahiyesine yerleşmişlerdir. Bunları ben Selanik'in ihtiyarlarından duymuştum. Kocacıklıların hepsi öz Türkçe konuşurlar. İri yarı adamlardır. Bunların hepsi Yörüktür. Hayvancılıkla geçinirler, sürüleri vardır. Bir kısmı da kerestecilik ederler. Bunların kıyafetleri Anadolu Türkmenlerine benzer. Yaşayışları, hatta lehçeleri de aynıdır."

Atatürk'ün babasını ve dedesi "Kızıl Hafız Ahmet"i tanıyan Eski Aydın Milletvekili Tahsin San Bey ve Eski Umumi Müfettiş ve Milletvekili Tahsin Uzer'den Kılıç Ali'nin ve Tahsin San Bey'den E. B. Şapolyo'nun naklettiği bilgiler de, Atatürk'ün baba soyunun "Anadolu'dan Rumeli'ye geçmiş olan Yörüklerden"olduğunu göstermektedir.

Yukarıda da değinildiği gibi, Atatürk'ün baba soyu. Konya/Karaman'dan gelerek Manastır Vilayeti'nin Debre-i Bala Sancağı'na bağlı Kocacık'a yerleşti. Aile sonradan Selanik'e göç etti. Dedesi Ahmet ve dedesinin kardeşi Hafız Mehmet'in taşıdığı "kızıl" lakabı ve yerleştikleri nahiyenin adı olan "Kocacık"ın da gösterdiği üzere; Mustafa Kemal'in baba tarafından soyu Anadolu'nun da Türkleşmesinde önemli roller oynayan "Kızıl-Oğuz" yahut "Kocacık Yörükleri Türkmenleri"nden gelmektedir.

ATATÜRK'ÜN DEDESİNİN KÖYÜ KOCACIK

A. Coğrafi Konumu


İşte Atatürk'ün dedelerinin Anadolu'dan gelerek yerleştikleri Osmanlı Devleti Döneminde Manastır (Bitola, Bitolji) Vilayeti'ne bağlı dört sancaktan biri olan "Debre-i Bala" (Debre, Debır, Debar, Debresko, Debarsko, Debarskoj)'nın merkezi, bugün Batı Makedonya'daki Debre şehridir. Ali Rıza Efendi'nin babası Kızıl Hafız Ahmet Efendi'nin doğduğu "Kocacık" nahiyesi de şimdi Jupa Bölgesi'nde yine aynı isimle anılan bir köydür.

1912 yılına kadar varlığını "nahiye merkezi" olarak sürdüren Kocacık, günümüzde Yukarı Jupa Belediyesi'ne bağlıdır. Makedonya'nın batı kesiminde yer alan Kocacık'ın kuzeyinde Debre, Güneyinde Struga ile Ohri, doğusunda Kırçova, batısında ise Arnavutluk yer almaktadır. Kocacık matematik konum olarak 41-42 derece kuzey enlemi (paraleli) ile 20-21 derece doğu boylamı (meridyeni) arasında bulunmaktadır. Debre'nin güneydoğusunda yer alan Kocacık, denizden 1080 m. Yüksekliktedir. Stogova Dağı'nın "Kocacık Yaylası" adı verilen bölümünün batı eteklerinde kurulmuştur.
Kocacık, bağlı olduğu Debre'ye 18 km., buna karşılık batı kesiminden Arnavutluk sınırına uzaklığı yaklaşık 8 km. kadardır. Struga'ya 45, Ohri (Ohrid)'ye 60. Kırçova 50, Manastır (Bitola)'a ise yaklaşık 150 kilometre uzaklıkta bulunmaktadır. Debre üzerinden Arnavutluk'a uzaklığı ise 24 km. kadardır.

Yedi mahalle ve on dört köyden oluşan Kocacık, kendisine bağlı köylerin dışında, merkez yerleşim bölgesi olarak; Bireştani, Koçişta ve Novak Köyleri arasında, kuzey ve kuzeybatı doğrultusunda uzanır. Kocacık merkezinin sınırları kuzeyde Koçişta Köyü, güneyde Ela (Eğla, Evla) Köyü, güneydoğuda Novak Köyü, batıda ise Osolnisa Köyü topraklan ile çevrilidir. Kuzeybatısında ise Bireştani Köyü yer almaktadır.

Bu sınırlar içinde Kocacık'a ait Bireştani Köyü ile Kocacık arasındaki kaleye "Kocacık Kalesi", tarlalara "Kolibalar", Yukarı Mahalle'nin üstündeki kıraç alanlara "Güronluk", Hamzaoğlu Mahallesi ile Bılato (Plato) Mahallesi arasındaki küçük koruya "Tatar Korisi", Bılato Mahallesi altındaki çukur alana "Gollük", Gollüğü çevreleyen yüksekçe düzlüğe "Laçeler", kuzeybatı sınırında yer alan mezarlığa "Büyük Şehitlik" (Erenler Mezarlığı), Burada yer alan açık alan ile kalenin üzerindeki düzlüğe "Namazlık" (Namazgah), köyün yer aldığı yaylaya "Kocacık Yayalası" (Bara Yaylası, Jupa Yaylası) ve yaylanın doruk noktasına "Büyük Doruk", Bu yayladaki akarsuya "Suğk Dere", bu suyun üst kısmına da "Üç Yutun" adı verilmektedir.

Kendi sınırları içinde bir şerit halinde uzanan Kocacık toprakları tarlalar, çayırlar, kırlar, otlaklar, kıraç alanlar, taşlıklar ve küçük ormanlardan oluşmaktadır. Kocacık merkez yerleşim bölgesinin çevresinde kendisine bağlı alanda; "Koçişta, Novak, Elessa Yaylaları" ile Novak Köyü'nün üstünde bir geçiş yeri olan "Demir Kapı" ve "Şahbaz Çayırı", Koçişta Köyü'nün bulunduğu yamaçta bir yer adı olan "Mialets ve Dip Kirez", Osolnisa Köyü'nün altında bulunan "Karataş ve Aktaş" adlı kayalar, Kocacık'ın karşısında yer alan "Krostes" adlı bayır, Kocacık ile Ela (Evla) Köyü arasında "Uşisa" geçidi yer almaktadır.

Kocacık yerleşim bölgesine ait olmayan ama Kocacık'ı çevreleyen sınır konumundaki Makedonlara ait yerler ise; "Luçişta Yaylası, Broştisa Yaylası, Büyük Meydanisa, Lokva Yaylası, Kaneş Yaylası, Istırna Milaçe Yaylası, Kara Orman, Gariyer ve Gıradişti Köyleri" adlarıyla anılmaktadır.
Bunlardan başka doğal kayalıklardan bazıları; Kocacık merkezinde "Kocacık Kalası", Koçişta Köyü'nde "Kabataş", Bireştani Köyü'nde "İpektaş" (İpekkaya), Pranlik Köyü'nde "Karakaya", Novak Köyü'nde "Urlok Taşı" adlarını taşımaktadır.

Akarsuları bakımından zengin olan Kocacık'ta kuzeyde Koçişta ile Kocacık arasında "Golostina Deresi" geçmekte, bu dere kuzey batıda "Bireştani Deresi" adını almaktadır. Hıristiyan halk ise eski bir Yunanlı göçebe kabilesi olan "Lağ Kabilesi"nin adını vermekte, dereye "Lağ Deresi" demektedir. Güneyde Kocacık ile Ela (Evla) Köyü arasında "Ossoy Deresi" akmakta, buna "Raven Deresi" de denmekte ve bu dereye güneydoğuda Novak ile Kocacık arasından akan "Demirkapı Deresi" karışmaktadır. Elessa Köyü'nün üstünden akan ve köyün tarlalarını sulayan akarsuya da "Kara Dere" denilmektedir.

"Kocacık" Adı, Mahalle Ve Köyleri

N. Kartal, konuyla ilgili önemli eserinde, hem söylencelere göre hem de bilimsel araştırmalara göre geniş bir değerlendirme yaptıktan sonra "Kocacık" adının "Kocacenk"ten geldiğini iddia etmektedir: "Bu bilgilerden anlaşılacağı gibi; 'Kocacık' adı, aslında Türkler ile İskender Bey arasında yapılan savaştan, bu savaşa verilen 'Büyük Savaş' anlamında 'Kocacenk' adından gelmektedir." Kanaatimizce bu değerlendirme doğru değildir.

Kocacık'ın adı, Rumeli'nin çok değişik yerlerine ve bu arada bu bölgeye de yerleşen "Kocacık Türkmenleri"nden gelmektedir. Anadolu ve Rumeli'de sıkça gördüğümüz üzere Kocacık Türkleri yerleştikleri bu bölgeye boy adlarını vermişlerdir. Yukarıda ayrıntılı bir şekilde ortaya konulduğu gibi, önceleri başlarında hakkında tarihi bilgimiz bulunmayan Hamza Bey'den dolayı "Koca Hamza Yörükleri" olarak anılan bu Yörükler, sonradan bulundukları yerlerde çoğunlukla "Kocacıklar" olarak anılmaya devam etmişlerdir. Tarihi, resmi kayıtları da kendi isimleri ile tutulmuştur. Nitekim, Kocacık içindeki bir mahalle adının "Hamzaoğlu Mahallesi" olması da bu görüşümüzü desteklemektedir. Hamza Bey'in hatırası burada yaşatılmıştır.

Kocacık, yedi mahalleden oluşan büyük bir yerleşim merkezidir. Bunlar, Yukarı Mahalle, Aşağı Mahalle, Taşlı Mahalle, Hamzaoğlu Mahallesi, Bilato Mahallesi, Yatürez Mahallesi, Kırasta Mahallesi'dir.
Kocacık, kuruluşundan XVI. yüzyılın ikinci yarısının başlangıcına (1568 yılının Mart ayı) kadar varlığını kasaba olarak sürdürmüş, 1863'ten sonra ise köy statüsüne tabi tutulmuş ve 1912 yılına kadar nahiye (bucak) merkezi olarak varlığını devam ettirmiştir. Mesela 1907'de Manastır Vilayeti'ne bağlı beş sancak bulunmaktadır. Bunlar; Manastır, Serfıce (2. sınıf) Debre (2. Sınıf) İlbasan (3. Sınıf) Görice (3. Sınıf) sancaklarıdır. Kocacık, Debre Sancağının kazalarından ve aynı zamanda kaza merkezi de olan Debre-i Bala kazasına bağlı 20 köylü bir nahiyedir.
O dönemde yönetim bakımından Kocacık Nahiyesine bağlı köylerin sayısı toplam 14'tür. Bu köylerden 7 tanesinin halkını Türkler oluşturmakta, anadil olarak Türkçe konuşulmaktadır.

Köylerden 1 tanesi anadili Makedonca'yı bırakarak Türkçe konuşmaya yönelmiştir. Geriye kalan köylerden 3 tanesinin halkı Makedonca konuşan Müslümanlardan, 1 tanesinin halkı Makedonca konuşan Müslüman ve Hıristiyanlardan, 1 tanesi de Makedonca ve Arnavutça konuşan Müslüman halktan, diğer 1 tanesi ise Makedonca konuşan Hıristiyan halktan oluşmaktadır. Bunların dışında Kocacık nahiyesine bağlı olmadıkları halde ekonomik yönden Kocacık ile ilişkisini sürdüren 3 köy daha vardır. Bu köylerden 2'sinin halkını Makedonca konuşan Müslümanlar (Torbeşler), 1'inin halkını da Makedonca konuşan Hıristiyanlar oluşturmaktadır.

Halkı Türk olan ve Türkçe konuşan Kocacık köyleri ve yaşayan nüfus durumları şu şekildedir: Ela Köyü: XX. yüzyılın sonunda 130; 1954'te 76 Türk'ün yaşadığı bu köyde 1957"deki göçlerden sonra kimse kalmamıştır. Köy camisi ve minaresi ile üç adet konut halen ayaktadır. Elessa Köyü: Kocacık'ın en büyük köyü olan Elessa'da XX. yüzyılın sonunda 550; 1954'te 633 Türk nüfus yamaktaydı. Göçlere rağmen halen 40'ı aşkın konutta Türkler yaşamaktadır. Novak Köyü: Kocacık'ın büyük köylerinden biri olan Novak'ta, XX. yüzyılın sonunda 600'den fazla; 1954 yılında ise 778 Türk yaşıyorken, göçlerden sonra nüfus azalmıştır. Bugün 60 konutluk bir aile grubu yaşamaktadır. Dılgaş Köyü: XX. yüzyılın sonunda 100 kadar; 1954'te ise 221 Türk'ün yaşadığı Dılgaş'tan bütün aileler göç ettiği için, bugün köy tamamen boşalmış bulunmaktadır."Bireştani Köyü: XX. yüzyılın sonunda 300'den fazla; 1954'te ise 15 sülaleden 48 aile içinde 259 Türk'ün yaşadığı köyde, bugün sadece 15'i aşkın konutluk bir Türk nüfusu yaşamaktadır. Osolnisa Köyü: XX. yüzyılda 200; 1954 yılında toplam 73 Türk'ün yaşadığı köyde; 1955'teki son göçten sonra nüfus hemen hemen tamamen yok olmuştur. Günümüzde sadece bir aile yaşamaktadır. Pralenik Köyü: XX. yüzyılın başlarında 250, 1954'te ise toplam 134 Türk'ün yaşadığı köy; 1957'deki son göçten sonra tamamen boşalmıştır. Günümüzde yaşayan yoktur. Koçişta Köyü: XX. yüzyılın sonlarında 180 Hıristiyan ile 175 Türk'ün yaşadığı köyde, günümüzde kimse kalmamıştır. Sadece bir konut ayaktadır.

Türkler Tarafından Fethi Ve Türk Kimliğinin Şekillenmesi

Kocacık yerleşim bölgesinin Türk tarihi ile ilişkisi Türklerin Rumeli'ye geçişi ile başlar. Kocacık'ın tarihi, bir bakıma Manastır'dan Üskiip'e uzanan Manastır, Ohri, Gostivar, Pirlepe, Kırçova, Debre, Üsküp Türklerinin tarihidir. Çünkü bu kentlerin Türk halkı aynı kökenlidir.

Yazılı kaynaklar Kocacık'taki Türk egemenliğinin 1448— 1912 yılları arasında sürdüğünü yazar. Bu duruma göre Kocacık'taki Türk egemenliği 464 yıl sürmüş demektir. Nitekim Kocacık'ın "Büyük Şehitlik"inde Numan Kartal tarafından yapılan incelemelerde mezar taşlarının en eskilerinin Rumi 900-905 tarihlerini taşıması da bunu göstermektedir. Bu tarihten daha önce ölenlerin başlarına tarihsiz taşların konduğu düşünülürse bu yargının doğruluğu anlaşılır.

Kaynaklara göre Türklerden önce yörenin halkını yerli Makedonyalılar ile "Malisorlar" teşkil ediyordu. III. yüzyıla dek Malisorlarla birlikte yaşayan Makedonyalılar, aynı yüzyılda güney ülkelerine akınlar yapan İslavların (Slavlar) saldırılarına uğradılar. Bu saldırılara dayanamayan Makedonyalıların bir bölümü Arnavutluk dağlarına çekildiler ve oralarda kendilerine yakın buldukları toplumlar içinde eridiler. VII. yüzyılda Sırplar, Arnavutluk'un kuzey kısmını zaptettiler. Zaptettikleri bu kısmı da 1360 yılına dek Sırp İmparatorluğu'nun güney tarafında yaşayan vilayetler haline getirdiler. Bu dönemde Arnavutluk'ta Arnavutlar arasında da derlenip toparlanma yoluna gidildi. Önce Arnavutlar, 1257-1258 yıllarında Bizans'a karşı ayaklandılar. Ardından 1272 tarihinde "Cari d'Anjo'yu" Arnavutluk kralı ilan ettiler. Bundan sonra Arnavutluk ile Osmanlı Türkleri arasında çatışmalar biçiminde ilişkiler görüldü. Bu dönemin ardından 1405 yılında doğan Kruja Prensi Gjen Kastriota'nın oğlu Gjergj Kastriot (İskender Bey), kendini yetiştirip güçlü bir yönetici olduktan sonra 1440 yılında Debre Sancakbeyi seçildi.
İskender Bey'in Debre Sancakbeyi seçilmesiyle birlikte Kocacık'ta Türk tarihi başlamış oldu. Çünkü, Türklerle İskender Bey'in Kocacık yöresindeki savaşları, İskender Bey'in Sancakbeyi seçilmesinden sonra oldu.

İskender Bey'in Türklerin saldırılarına pek elverişli olmayan kuzey ve merkezi Arnavutluk'a bağlı Aşağı Debre ile Yukarı Debre'de malikaneleri (çiftlikleri ve geniş toprakları) ile şatoları vardı. Bu topraklardan biri de Kocacık idi. Kocacık, doğal yapısı ile o günün koşullarında ordulara yeterli hareket olanağı vermediğinden dolayı özellikle İskender Bey tarafından bir yerleşim birimi olarak seçilmişti. Kuzeyden güneye giden yolların geçit yerinde bulunması, doğal yapıdan dolayı kolay korunma olanağının olması da Kocacık ve Kocacık Kala'sının (Kalesinin) önemini arttırmış, İskender Bey'in buraya yerleşmesinin nedeni olmuştu.

Osmanlı Türkleri bu yerin önemini kavramakta gecikmedi. Çünkü, Üsküp yönünden gelip Debre üzerinde güneye ve Arnavutluk'un içerlerine doğru akınlarda bulunacak olan Osmanlı kuvvetlerinin İskender Bey'i devreden çıkarıp buradan geçmesi bir zorunluluktu. Bu nedenle Kocacık'ın alınması gerekiyordu. Hatta Balkanların içlerine doğru yapılacak akınlarla İskender Bey, bir engel teşkil ediyordu, bu nedenle de Kocacık'ın alınması bir zorunluluk oluyordu.

Bu gerçeği gören Sultan II. Murad, hiç tereddüt etmedi, Kocacık'a akın emrini verdi. Kocacık'a ilk akının oluşunu Aşıkpaşaoğlu söyle anlatır: "Hünkar bir gün: Kocacık Hisarına sefer edelim dedi. İsa Beğ'i öncü gönderdi." Bu akınlar sırasında ilk çarpışmalar Kocacık ile Ela Köyü arasında bulunan "Uşisa" sırtlarında oldu. Bu savaşta, Aşıkpaşaoğlu'nun deyişiyle akıncıların çoğu "gaza niyeti diye şehit oldular. Ancak, hayli yerler dahi fetholdu." Bu fethin tarihi Hicri 846 (Miladi: 12 Mayıs 1442-30 Nisan 1443) yılıdır.

Ancak İskender Bey rahat durmadı. Türklerle İskender Bey arasında tam beş kez savaş yapıldı. Bu savaşlar 1443-1448 yılları arasında oldu. Savaşlar sırasıyla bugünkü Kocacık ile Ela Köyü arasında bulunan Uşisa sırtlarında, Kocacık Kala'sı altındaki "Karakol" mevkiinde, Osolnisa Köyü yanında, Beşevler (Bireştani) Köyü altında ve Kocacık'ın "Erenler" denilen ve "Büyük Şehitlik" adı da verilen yerinde oldu. Bu savaş yerlerinde şehitliklere bakıldığında Uşisa sırtlarındaki şehitlikte 150'yi, Karakol mevkiindeki şehitlikte 300'ü, Osolnisa altındaki şehitlikte 500'ü aşkın şehidin yattığı kolayca farkedilebilir. Hatta bir çarpışma yeri olan Uşisa sırtlarındaki şehitlerin düştükleri yönde gömüldükleri, baş taraflarının çeşitli yönlerde oluşundan anlaşılır.

Öncü güçlerin çatışmasından, diğer bir deyişle pek büyük olmayan birliklerin savaşmasından meydana geldiği anlaşılan bu savaşların tümünü İskender Bey'in kazanması ününe ün katmasına neden olmuştur.
İskender Bey, kazandığı bu zaferleri "Hıristiyanlığın Müslümanlığa karşı galibiyeti" şeklinde nitelendirmiş ve savaşların yapıldığı Kocacık yerine kutsal yer gözüyle bakmıştır. İskender Bey, bu zaferleriyle Osmanlıya karşı Hıristiyanlığın olduğu kadar Avrupa'nın ve Avrupalıların da koruyucusu durumuna gelmiştir. Bir yazarımızın dediği gibi; "İskender Bey'i evrensel ve ünlü bir şahsiyet haline getiren nedenlerin başında, II. Murat ve II. Mehmet gibi iki büyük ve güçlü Osmanlı padişahına mukavemet etmesi ve o zamanların dini ve jeopolitik durumuna göre, Hıristiyan Avrupa'yı koruyan kalkan gibi nitelenıuesidir. Onun hakkında yazılan sayısız eserler, kendisini Hıristiyanlığın ve Avrupa medeniyetinin kurtarıcısı olarak göstermiştir."

İskender Bey'in bu yörede Türklerle yaptığı son büyük savaş, "Erenler" ya da "Büyük Şehitlik" denilen Kocacık Kale'si anındaki büyük düzlükte Hicri 851, Miladi 19 Mart 1447 ile 6 Mart 1448 tarihleri arasında yapılmış ve savaş Türklerin kesin zaferi ile sonuçlanmıştır.

Önceki akınların her defasında İskender Bey'in başarı kazanması Sultan II. Murad'ı kızdırmış, onda yenilgilerin intikamını almak istediğini doğurmuştur. Bu nedenle kumandanlarından İsa Bey'i İskender Bey'in üzerine göndermiş, ardından kendisi Kocacık'a gelerek bizzat ordunun başına geçmiştir. Bu savaşın büyük ve kanlı olduğunu, Kocacık'taki "Büyük Şehitlik'te" yatan üç bini aşkın şehit mezarı da göstermektedir. Zaten, Türk ordularına İsa Bey'in kumanda etmesi, ardından II. Murad'ın Kocacık'a gelip, ordunun başına geçmesi ve zaferin ardından kışı Kocacık Kala'sında geçirmesi de savaşın büyük ordu birlikleri arasında yapıldığını ve çok çetin geçtiğini kanıtlamaktadır.

Hatta tarihçiler:

"bu sırada Sultan Murad, Arnavutluk'a gidip, Arnavutluk sınırına yakın yerde bulunan bugünkü Kocacık'ı fethetti" diyerek bir bakıma Sultan II. Murad'ı "Kocacık Fatihi" olarak da göstermişlerdir.

Bu fetih sırasında Kocacıklılar, yaşlıların deyişine göre Anadolu'nun Konya-Karaman bölgesi ile Aydın ve Söke yöresinden gelen atlılar olarak "Konyarlar" (Hudut Gazileri, Akıncılar) adıyla İsa Bey komutasında savaşlara katıldılar. Çok çetin geçen savaş sırasında üç binden fazlası şehadet şerbetini içti, bu nedenle bu savaşa "Kocaceng" denildi. Bugün bile ayakta duran ve üç binden fazla şehidin yattığı yer olan "Erenler" (Büyük Şehitlik), çetin geçen "Kocaceng'in" (Büyük Savaş'ın) anısını yüzyılların ötesinden günümüze dek yaşatan ve Tanrı'ya ulaşanları ölümsüzleştiren canlı anıt olarak yaşamaktadır. Sultan II. Murad, savaş sonrası yiğitlik gösteren bu Akıncı Türklerinin sağ kalanlarına savaş yöresini tımar olarak vermiş, onlar da buraya yerleşerek Kocacık'ta Türk yerleşim bölgesini meydana getirmişlerdir.

Kocacıklılar, birçok Türkler gibi, yeni yerleştikleri yere kolayca uyma, iyi ve güzeli alma ve de devamlılık (continuateur) yeteneği sonucu yeni yerleşim yerlerine yerleşmekte güçlük çekmediler. Çünkü; tümü hayvancılık, ustalık, tarım gibi işlerle uğraşıyordu. Kocacık'ın güzel yaylaları, az da olsa tarıma elverişli toprakları ile iklimi uğraşları yönünden kendilerine elverişli geliyordu. Bu durum Osmanlı Devleti'nin politikasına da uygun düşüyordu. Osmanlı Devleti'ne göre Kocacık'a yerleşen Türkler, hem devletin ileri bir karakolu görevini görecek hem de çevredeki Hıristiyanları Müslümanlaştırmakta etkin bir rol oynayacaktı. Nitekim, öyle de oldu. Devrin hükümdarı Sultan II. Murad, akınlarla bulunduğu Arnavutluk'a karşı Kocacık Hisarı'nı ileri bir karakol ve konaklama yeri olarak kullandı. Öte yandan çevrede bulunan Hıristiyan köylerden "Büyük Papranik", "Ufak Papranik", "Jitnenik" (Jitnelik), "Balanisa" köyleri ile "Broştisa Köyü"nün bir bölümü XVI. yüzyılın ilk yarısında kendi dinleri olan Hıristiyanlığı terkettiler, buna karşın Müslümanlığı kabul ettiler. Hatta, "Koçişta Köyü"nde kimi Makedonlar dinleriyle birlikte dillerini de terkettiler. Müslümanlığın yanı sıra anadil olarak Türkçe'yi benimsediler. Zaman içinde kendilerini Türk saydıklarından Balkan Savaşı'nın ardından Türkiye'ye geç ettiler. Müslümanlığı kabul eden Makedonlar, Türklerin tüm gelenek ve göreneklerini de aldılar. Günümüzde kendilerine "Bizler Makedonca konuşan Torbeşleriz" demektedirler. Kendilerine "Türk" değil de "Torbeş" demelerinin nedeni ise; diğer Arnavut ve Türk gibi yöre halkının bu deyimi kullanması ve Türklerin Müslümanlığı kabul eden Makedonları Türk saymamasıdır. Bunların bir kısmı Kocacıktılar, 1912'den sonra Türkiye'ye göçtüler. Türkiye'de kendilerine 'Kocacık Türklerindeniz" dediler ve Makedonca'yı bırakıp iirkçe'yi anadil olarak seçtiler. Ancak çoğunluğu anayurt aydıkları Yugoslavya'nın Makedonya bölümünde kaldılar.

Kocacıklıların birbirlerine saygının sınırsızlığı içinde, kavga ve dövüşten uzak yaşamalarını mutluluk içinde 1912 yılına dek sürdürdüler. İlk kurulduğunda küçük bir yerleşim birimi olan Kocacık, belgelere göre 1568'in Mart ayında kasaba haline getirildi. 1863 yılına dek kasaba olarak yaşayan Kocacık, bu tarihten sonra köy statüsüne tabi tutuldu ve Debre İlçesi'ne bağlı bir nahiye merkezi olarak varlığını XX. yüzyılın ilk yarısına kadar sürdürdü.

Further Details at Source: http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=881


http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showth ... ost3676101
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Re: Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 06 Tem 2015, 16:35

Witness yazdı:Öncelikle Batılılardan bu kadar nefret edip, bir Batı ülkesinde yaşaman hayret verici. Hafız meselesine gelirsek, seni iyi kandırmışlar. Olsa bile bir şey değişmez, Aziz Nesin'de gençken hafızdı. İcraate bakacaksın, bugün bu gaylere bu ortamı oluşturacak sosyal değişimin temellerini Kemal Paşa attı, İslam karşıtıydı. Sindirsende, sindirmesende gerçek bu. Ayrıca Vahdettin'in Kemal Paşa'ya icazet verip Anadolu'ya gönderdiği artık ispat edilmiş bir gerçek. Kemal Paşa seküler diktatördü, Stalin'den veya Hitler'den pek farklı değildi. Onlar kadar öldürmedi yalnız. Sadece inkilaplarının önünde engel gördüğü binlerce imamı, şeyhi filan İstiklal mahkemelerinde astırttı. Kimin İngilizlerle işbirliğine gittiğini istersen hiç tartışmayalım, altından kalkamazsın.


Herhalde siz yabancı dil ve Türkçe ile forumlerde yazan kişiler hep aynı yöneticilerden troll stratejileri alıyorsunuz. Hep aynı tür mantıksız mesajları yazarak kendinizi açık bir şekilde deşifre ediyorsunuz. Sen açık bir şekilde bir Türk ve Atatürk düşmanısın, hatta senin gibilerinin Türk olmadığınız halde burada Türk'müş gibi yorumlar yazdığınızdan bile şüpheleniyorum.

Ben ise tüm Batılılardan filan nefret etmiyorum, ben sadece Irak'ta sırf masum insanların kaynaklarını sömürmek ve pazarlamak için, 1,5 milyon insana soykırım uygulayan ve namusuna ırzına geçen şerefsiz adamların zihniyetinden nefret ediyorum. Sen ise bu düşman zihniyete put gibi tapınmayı kutsal sayan, ama aynı anda Atatürk'ten nefret eden onursuz bir kişiliğe sahip birisin.

Atatürk Hafız'dı, kabul et, bunun yalan olduğunu ispat edebiliyorsan seni İngiltere'nin Müslüman padişahı yaparım ödül olarak. Senin gibi sapkın insanlar "Atatürk Kuran'ı yere attı" gibi sapık yalanları 18 yaşı altındaki yatılı okullarda eşcinsel skandalları yaşıyan cahil gençlerimize yaymakla meşgulsünüz.

Samimi olsan BİR TANE örnek verirdin Atatürk'ün din düşmanı olduğunu gösteren, ama GERÇEK ŞUDUR Kİ ATATÜRK OLMASAYDI BUGÜN DÜNYADAKİ MÜSLÜMANLARIN SAYISI BELKİ TOPLAMDA 1-2 MİLYON CİVARINDA OLACAKTI.

Buradaki bilgileri okuyun ve aydınlanın: Vahdettin'in Hainliğini İspatlayan Gerçekler

http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=227&t=12159 yazdı:Başından beri anlattığım gibi Vahdettin’in kurtuluş planı, “düşmana karşı silahlı direniş” değil, “düşmanın merhametine sığınmaktır.” Vahdettin, özellikle Paris Barış Konferansı’nın arifesinde, İzmir’deki kanlı olaylardan dolayı Batı kamuoyu da Türkiye’nin lehine dönmüşken, İngilizleri memnun ederek, onların bir dediğini iki etmeyerek İngiliz desteğini arkasına aldığı takdirde işgallerin sona ereceğini ve devletin kurtulacağını düşünmektedir. Yani Vahdettin’e göre “devletin kurtuluşu” İngilizleri memnun etmekle mümkündür. O sırada İngilizleri memnun etmenin biricik yolu ise, İngilizlerin 21 Nisan tarihli notası doğrultusunda Anadolu’daki karışıklıkları önlemektir. Dolayısıyla Padişah Vahdettin’in, bu karışıkları önleyecek paşaya, Yıldız Sarayı’nda “Paşa Paşa devleti kurtarabilirsin” derken kastettiği şey, İngilizlerin notası doğrultusunda Anadolu’daki karışıklıkların önlenmesi ve asayişin sağlanmasıdır.

Ayrıca Vahdettin tek “kurtuluş planının” İtilaf Devletleri’ne güvenmek olduğunu anılarında açıkça itiraf etmiştir:

“Devlet tehlikede ve İstanbul sallantıda idi. Şahsen müstakil bir siyasetim yoktu, ama kurtuluşumuz için babam Abdülmecit Han’dan miras aldığım İtilaf Devletleri’ne yakınlık politikasını, İngilizlerin zıddına hareket etmemek ve Fransızlarla İngilizleri gücendirmemek şeklinde, uyuşmacı bir siyaseti seçmiştim. Böylelikle anlaşma olmasa bile hiç olmazsa husumetlerini (düşmanlıklarını), şiddet ve nefretlerini azaltmaya çalışıyordum ”

Vahdettin ile Atatürk’ün “devletin kurtuluşundan” anladıkları çok farklı şeylerdir. Vahdettin’in “devletin kurtuluşu” yöntemi, İngilizleri memnun etmek ve onların desteğini almak biçimindeyken; Atatürk’ün “devletin kurtuluşu” yöntemi, bütün düşmanlara karşı mücadele ederek tam bağımsızlığı elde etmek biçimindedir. Ayrıca, Vahdettin, “devletin kurtuluşu” derken aynı zamanda kendi tahtı ve tacını kastederken, Atatürk, “devletin kurtuluşu” derken, ulusun egemenliğini kastetmektedir. “Müttefiklerin, bitip tükenmeyen isteklerini yerine getirmekten bıktığım söyleyen Padişah’ın özlemini çektiği kurtuluş, onların şikâyetlerinin giderilerek Osmanlı taç ve tahtını koruyacak olabildiğince ılımlı bir barışa biran önce kavuşmak olmalıdır. Mustafa Kemal ise başından beri bireysel ya da hanedana sınırlı bir kurtuluş değil, yurdu ve ulusu içeren bütünsel bir kurtuluş amaçlamaktadır. ”

Resim

Atatürk, Samsun’a çıkıp, kafasındaki “kurtuluş planı” doğrultusunda direniş hazırlıklarına başlayınca İngilizler, Sadrazam Damat Ferit ve Padişah Vahdettin’den “Atatürk’ü bir an önce İstanbul’a geri çağırmalarını istemişler”, bu doğrultuda hemen harekete geçen Damat Ferit ve Padişah Vahdettin, birkaç defa Atatürk’ü İstanbul’a geri çağırmışlar, ancak Atatürk bütün bu çağrılara olumsuz cevap vererek, gerekirse “sine-i millette bir ferdi mücahit olarak” mücadelesini sürdüreceğini bildirmiş ve istifa etmiştir. Bunun üzerine Padişah Vahdettin, 8 Temmuz 1919’da Atatürk’ün müfettişlik görevine son vermiştir.

Source: Atatürk’ün Samsun’a Çıkışı ve Vahdettin


Stalin ve Hitler, İngiliz ajanı idiler ve Atatürk ise İngiliz ordusunu dize getirip, mağlup edip kancık gibi kaçmalarını sağlamıştır.

Churchill, Hitler and Stalin Work Together

Stalin's British Training

Adolf Hitler, The Incestuous Catholic Jew

Hitler was a British Agent

İzmir'in Menemen ilçesinde yaşanan insanlık dışı katliamda, Kubilay'ın İngiliz mandacısı yobaz hainler tarafından kafasının kesilerek şehit edilmesi sonrasında idam edilen şerefsiz yobazlardan, o sahte Müslümanlardan, Emevi dinine inanan o sapık adamların idamından bahsediyorsun herhalde. Senin put gibi tapındığın İngiltere ve ABD'de bir askeri bukadar vahşi ve haince katledilsin, ozaman bak sen o put gibi tapındığın düşman devletlerin yaptıklarına. Yahu, insanda utanma olur, ben sizin gibi insanların adına utanıyorum açıkçası, böyle aşşağılık bir şekilde argümanlar kullanacak kadar alçalmışsınız ve mantıktan uzaksınız, daha ne diyebilirim.

Tehditle bilim olmuyor, belgeleri, dokümanları sırala gerçekler ortaya çıksın, bu forumdaki diğer put kardeşlerin gibi mantıksız yorumlar yazarak hiç kimseyi etkileyemezsiniz, bu dostça bir uyarım olsun sizlere.

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showth ... ops/page31
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Re: Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 07 Tem 2015, 03:31

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:The wikipedia article mentioned the destruction of a single city - Isfahan - that resulted to between 100,000 and 200,000 people massacred. Tamerlane destroyed many more cities, not just Isfahan. Can you grasp it moron?


Do i have to repeat each time, that when you start insulting me, it clearly shows that you are desperate, and that your arguments are of very low quality and are based on non scientific faked up information?

First of all, what is the exact historical source giving the number of between 100.000 and 200.000? And i am not your history teacher, give me the exact ancient source with the quote mentioned with the numbers, DO NOT COME TO ME WITH AN ESTIMATE. Between 100.000 and 200.000 is an estimate, not a fact, the people that estimated this are NOT fortune tellers, so to begin with if you want me to take your argument seriously, make up your arguments in a more scientific way, and i promise you i do not have denial stress problems and hate crime feelings like your kind.

Secondly, how does someone FALL DOWN from a number from 17 MILLION to between 100.000 and 200.000? What are the exact historical documents that lead you to give the number of 17 million? IF YOU CANT PROOF YOURSELF, IF YOU CANT PROOF THE 17 MILLION NUMBER, THEN I DECLARE THAT YOU ARE A SIMPLE LIAR, AND ARE NOT FIT TO CONDUCT A HEALTHY AND SCIENTIFIC DISCUSSION, END OF THE POINT! Its obvious your only purpose is to change the subject, like your Turk hating other friends. This topic is about the Armenian Slander, you lost the discussion about that, you do not have any more lies in your closet to use in your arguments, then you start to direct the discussion to another subject, your intentions are so easy to spot :)

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:Read history. The death toll of Genghis Khan was so impressive, it turned the planet greener! There is even archaeologic evidence that pastures went abandoned for decades after Genghis Khan passed from there. China had a census, and the population of North China was reduced by 40 million after the conquest of Genghis Khan!!!


I do not take your numbers serious, what is the historical ancient source for the number of 40.000.000? You wont provide it, because you are a simple liar.

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:Wikipedia provides the source about Isfahan:

Chaliand, Gerard; Arnaud Blin (2007). The History of Terrorism: From Antiquity to Al Qaeda. University of California Press. p. 87.ISBN 978-0520247093.

Do you suggest that all 100,000 to 200,000 citizens of Isfahan were combatants and that their murder was simply an act of war? Of course it was genocide you moron! An entire city was wiped off the map!!!


This is a present day book, with a bad intended title including "Al Qaeda". Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization created and still used by the US government. Give me the exact historical ancient source where the number of 17 MILLION and 100.000-200.000 is mentioned.

The US should stop with the false propaganda in which they want to proof that they are against terror, in fact the US is the main source of the majority of all international terrorist and illegal organizations. Did anyone of you know that Osama bin Laden was a CIA agent. Please have a look at the following picture in which Osama bin Laden is trained by CIA agent Zbigniew Brzezinski. How could the El Kaide and the sub group called ISIS be against the US, if they are created and controlled by the US? If the US is the source of dozens of terrorist organizations, then why does the United Nations not put an EMBARGO ON THE US?

Resim

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:Do you suggest that all 100,000 to 200,000 citizens of Isfahan were combatants and that their murder was simply an act of war? Of course it was genocide you moron! An entire city was wiped off the map!!!


Lets talk about the real truth of what happened during the Isfahan situation. What really happened, was:

1. Timur aimed to conquer Isfahan at 1387 AD.

2. Timur and the Isfahan Regime made an Agreement: "If Isfahan surrenders, no harm will come to anyone". It is a tradition in the Turk Culture that if a population surrenders, no harm will be done to them, they can live their religions and culture forever, and it is a well known fact that foreign people always became rich and had high status jobs in the Turk state.

Most important example is Marco Polo, how could such a foreign person become so famous and so rich, if the Turks(Kubilai Khan) were racists? And look at the dozens of examples with Ogedei Khan, when people surrender to Turk rule, they always got peace an equal rights, genocide was never committed.

Look at the Ottoman state history, you will see that Armenians, Jews and other foreign people had always been very rich with high status jobs.

Look at the people Attila trusted most, you will see they were all foreigners. Look at the sources of Priscus, and you will see that foreigners could become very rich merchants under the Hun-Turk rule because of the equal and non racist laws. Look at how noble the Turks are, and look how disgusting, unhuman and racist the US army is with their 1,5 million of genocide against the Iraqi Muslims during a PEACE PERIOD, just for the purpose of WEAPON TRADING, SLAVE TRADING, HUMAN ORGANS TRADING, OIL TRADING!

3. Isfahan surrendered, they agreed with the terms of Timur.

4. 4.000 Chagatayid soldiers of the Army of Timur settled into Isfahan to rule in there.

5. The Isfahani's BROKE THE AGREEMENT, AND KILLED 3.000 OF THE 4.000 CHAGATAYID SOLDIERS. 1.000 Chagatayid soldiers rescued their life's with luck, sheltering in the city.

6. In reaction to this treason and massacre, Timur responds with the killing of 70.000 Isfahani people who were involved in the massacre of the 3.000 Chagatayid soldiers. So, the numbers of 100.000, 200.000 or 17.000.000 is totally a lie. OF COURSE, the death of even 1 innocent person, is something to be sad about. But there is NO GENOCIDE DONE at the situation in Isfahan, this is a clear WAR, and it is the Middle Age period, a period of constant wars and conquest. Altough the agreement and surrender, the Isfahani's kills 3.000 of the 4.000 Chagatayid soldiers, and Timur reacts to this and kills 70.000 of the Isfahani people, this is clearly a WAR!

Source: Prof. Dr. Cüneyt KANAT

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:Where did I claim that Tamerlane forced a genocide against the Ottoman Turks? I mentioned Isfahan which was not part of the Ottoman empire. You accuse me of something I never wrote! Tamerlane was indeed a Turk who pretended to be a Mongol. Get used to it.


You are so imcopetent, you either do not want to understand or really have a low IQ and cant understand what i really meant with the Ottoman example. Timur, and Ottoman sultan Yildirim Beyazid, were BOTH TURKS and were BOTH NOT RACISTS and both DID NOT COMMIT ANY GENOCIDE. And Mongols are not a different nation, the term "Mongol" is the name of a Turk confederation of tribes beginning from the 12th century AD.

What i was trying to teach you, was that if Timur was a racist, and if he had goals for genocide, then he would NOT have attacked the Ottoman Empire. In fact, the only goal of Timur was to expand his Empire, and honour, respect and promises were very important to Timur. In fact, the respectless letters of Yildirim Beyazid were the reasons for Timur to attack the Ottoman army, he had no goal for any kind of genocide. During his conquest plans, he gave peace and equal rights to all populations that surrendered, there are clear examples about this.

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:False definition. The NAZI Germans for example did not attempt to destroy every ethnic group within NAZI Germany. Only the Jews and - partially - the Slavs. According to your definition, they did not commit genocide because they didn't try to exterminate all other non-German groups, like the French in occupied France or the Norwegians in occupied Norway!


No, you are twisting my arguments. "All" or "One" does not matter, i did not imply that it is necessary to destroy ALL foreign ethnic groups, what i meant was that IF a state will have the goal to on purposely "DESTROY" ONE OR MORE OF ALL FOREIGN ETHNIC GROUPS within its borders, then this is GENOCIDE. Actually you understood very good what i meant.

The French and the Germans(Allemagne) are both tribes of ancient "Germanic" origin. Again, you are so incompetent and so ignorant NOT TO KNOW THIS SIMPLE FACT. So, the reason why the Nazi's did not touch the French, is because they are historically of the same ethnic origin.

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:Of course they have a relationship. Genocides happen usually during wars. Probably only during wars because mass extinctions outside of wars are defined as "genocides".


A war is between TWO ARMIES, civil people are not part of a war. Genocide, is when CIVIL NON MILITARY PEOPLE gets killed by "another state or organization" on purposely with racist reasons, with or without the goal for conquest. During a War, there are many rules, the honourfull Turk history is full with examples of how these rules and ethical traditions are conducted by the Turks during the wars. Look at the historical records of the Battle of Gallipolli during the First World War(1914-1918), ask any present day Australian people, they will confirm "HOW NOBLE THE TURK CULTURE IS". During the Battle of Gallipolli, the Turkish soldiers WERE SUCH NOBLE PEOPLE, they gave treatment(during the battle) to the foreign Australian-British enemy soldiers who were screaming for help because of their wounds and by the way were trying to invade our country(not successful of course).

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:Genghis Khan - 50 million corpses. Tamerlane - 17 million corpses. Keep blabbering!!!

Not that many, but you massacred hundreds of thousands of people during various rebellions. There was on average a rebellion in Greece every 2.5 years during the Ottoman rule!!!


These are non scientific numbers, and are LIES, and i have proven in the previous examples very hardly how wrong your numbers are. Your statements do not mean anything, and are not reliable, not at all. Your insulting words only give confidence to me, because it shows that i am right :)

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:They were. You just admitted above that Tamerlane attacked the Ottoman empire. Didn't you even realize it?


Which historical record shows, that during the peaceful Ottoman rule of Iraq, that only within 12 years there was made a genocide of 1,5 million innocent civil non military Muslims? Dont worry, you will not be able to come up with an example in the Ottoman period, because Muslims lived in peace during the Ottoman rule of Iraq. Again, the situation between Timur and Yildirim Beyazid is a WAR between TWO MILITARY ARMIES. The situation of the US army in Iraq, IS NOT A WAR. The British already conquered Iraq after the 1st WW, then after the 2nd WW the US army took over the Iraqi rule from their brother British army. In 2003, the US again invaded Iraq which was already their own property, and again got control of the country only within a couple of weeks. But after they controlled the situation in Iraq, and after the change of the Iraqi government, after the installation of new US-CIA puppets in the Iraqi government, Iraq was not a country in War anymore. So, between 2003 and 2015, within a peaceful period of time, the US army and their puppet terrorist organizations and their controlled sleeper cells MADE AN OBVIOUSLY CLEAR GENOCIDE ON 1,5 MILLION MUSLIM IRAQIS ONLY WITHIN 12 YEARS, and i dont count the Genocides performed by the UK and US between 1918 and 2003 in Iraq. Also not counting about the Muslim Genocide committed by the US army in Afghanistan.

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:This was NOT a genocide you moron! A genocide requires physical extinction of a large number of people. Those prisoners in Abu Ghraib were not executed. THEY WERE TORTURED, BUT THEY ARE STILL ALIVE. Grow up you moron!!!


Again, stop it with your denial stress disease. Go see a doctor or something, and get yourself immediately medicated, your health is not going into the good direction :)

They are not alive, you are making unsubstantiated leaps in logic. Many of the people in the photos are murdered, i dont think you are blind, and the truth stand for itself, you can keep on with your denying process, what happened in there is an UNHUMAN ACT OF THE US ARMY WHICH IS CALLED "THE ABU GHRAIB GENOCIDE". These Muslims were made "Şehit", so they were all killed after the torturing, experimenting and organ trading unhuman business processes were finished.

Additional photos to enlighten your unhuman soul:

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim

Resim
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Re: Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 07 Tem 2015, 08:14

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:That was not a betrayal. The Ottoman empire was not democratic. If you didn't respect the will of the Armenian people within the Ottoman empire, they didn't betray you!


Believe me, the Ottoman Empire was more democratic and gave more rights to foreign people than to his own Turk people. While the Oghuz Turkmen, Kipchak and Karluk Turks(mostly farmers, Yoruk lifestyle) were living poor lives, the foreign people like the majority of Armenians, Greeks, Jews, Serbs, etc. were all people with high status jobs in the Ottoman state, and the Ottoman state gave them the freedom and even more rights for trading and personal businesses. Read the historical documents, you will see that my arguments are true.

Non Turks were more rich than the Turks, during the Ottoman period, what kind of equal rights and democracy do you want more? You can not provide any kind of non democratic unhuman acts of the Ottoman state against the foreign populations. The Armenians lived 1000 years together in peace with the Turks, then all the sudden beginning with the 1st WW they start rebelling, does this sound logical? No, it is not logical, because Hovannes Kajaznuni itself confirmed they were used and deceived by the British and Tsar Russians!

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:That was because you didn't allow democracy to flourish in the Ottoman empire, and because you kept massacring them in the past:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamidian_massacres


Wikipedia is such an academic source, isnt it(being sarcastic)?

1. The Tsar Russian Empire and their masters the British Empire builded the Dashnaktsutyun and Hinchak Terrorist Organizations in 1887 and 1890.

2. The goal of the Tsar Russian Empire and the British Empire for building the Dashnaktsutyun and Hinchak was to DIVIDE THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE.

3. The Dashnaktsutyun and Hinchak terrorists made genocide on hundreds of thousands of Muslim Turks and Kurds starting from 1887 and 1890. At the bottom, i will provide many sources and links, showing clearly what kind of Muslim Genocide the Dashnaktsutyun and Hinchak terrorists made beginning from 1887 and 1890.

4. The Ottoman Empire builded the "Hamidiye Alayları" in 1891 to form a defense against these Dashnaktsutyun and Hinchak terrorists whom were the puppets of the Tsar Russian Empire and the British Empire. The Tsar Russian Empire and the British Empire tried to divide and conquer the Ottoman Empire with military actions, and as a logical reaction the Ottoman Empire defended its independency by reacting with counter military reactions. This is a WAR, NOT A GENOCIDE. It was a preview of the First World War that was coming to start very soon. The Ottoman Empire was tired, and ready fall apart, the Armenians were proudly being used as puppets[B], and hereby betrayed their Ottoman Turk and Kurd countrymen, with the genocides they performed against the civil non military Muslims in Anatolia, especially in Eastern Anatolian regions.

5. Mutual massacres occurred, Muslim and Christian soldiers, it was a brutal war. But the most important part, during a peace period, the Armenians who were living in the Ottoman territories(were not living in the Russian territories) performed major genocides on the civil non military innocent defenseless Muslim Turks and Kurds in the Eastern Anatolian regions like Van and Erzurum. The unhuman acts of the Armenian terrorist groups were so huge, the number of the Muslim population in the cities like Van and Erzurum were completely erased, because they were mostly murdered by the Armenians. After these Muslim genocides many Eastern Anatolian regions were added to the Tsar Russian Empire. But of course, during the Turk War of Independence, with the fall of the Tsar Russia and the rise of the Soviet Revolution, all these Eastern Anatolian regions were conquered back from the Russians by the Turks.

6. Reading the following Report of Hovhannes Kajaznuni, the first Prime Minister of the First Republic of Armenia, shows that all my arguments above are completely true:

http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12301 yazdı:CONGRESS REPORT TO THE TASHNAK PARTY

Hovhannes Kajaznuni, or Hovhannes Katchaznouni (Armenian: Յովհաննէս Քաջազնունի) (1 February 1868 – 1938) was the first Prime Minister of the First Republic of Armenia from May 30, 1918 to May 28, 1919. He was a member of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation.

Hovhannes Kajaznuni, has submitted a report to the Congress of the Tashnaksütyun Party which was held in 1923 in Bucharest-Romania. In this report, Hovhannes Kajaznuni bravely tells the truth about what happened during and after the First World War.

The Summary of the Report of Hovhannes Kajaznuni is like this:

"The Tsar Russia, England and France DECEIVED us Armenians. They told us that they would give us a state reaching from a sea to another sea, and hereby they armed us(gave us weapons) and send us to the fire(to risk ourselves, to die for them, to kill innocent people for them, for what they promised us).

The Turks acted in the pupose of defending. Mutual massacres happened. We massacred the Muslim population. Guiltiness(The ones that did wrong) should not be sought outside of the Dashnak Party. In this case, htere is nothing left to do for the Dashnak Pary. The Dashnak Pary should dissolve itself.
"
The remaining other Armenian statesmen did also write reports like this.


http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=5557 yazdı:MUSLIM MORTALITY IN THE EAST

No one counted the dead of the wars in the Caucasus and eastern Anatolia. To estimate their numbers one can only list the differences between the populations of the east before and after the wars. The result is not strictly "war deaths," because births and natural deaths (i.e., deaths that would normally have occurred without war) are included in the figures. Nevertheless, one can assume that births and natural deaths roughly balanced each other out, leaving a fairly accurate estimate of wartime mortality. (Deaths of Muslim soldiers who were native to those areas and thus entered in the population registers are necessarily included in the figures.) More serious complications arise from the effects of migration. The exodus of Muslim refugees from the Caucasus added to the postwar population of Erzurum Vilâyeti by as much as 10,000, for example. There is some evidence of Kurdish migrations into Van, Bitlis, and Erzurum, somewhat replacing the Armenians gone from those provinces. These migrations artificially lowered the number of wartime deaths listed in Table 21. Because the figures in Table 21 are in fact the result of subtracting the population in 1922 from the population in 1912, the inclusion of immigrants in the 1922 figures makes it appear as if there were fewer Muslim deaths than there were. The problem is particularly acute for Trabzon Vilâyeti and, to a lesser extent, for Adana Vilâyeti. The Trabzon region was and is one of the most salubrious and economically important in Anatolia. It would be extremely unlikely that Turks from other areas of Anatolia did not migrate to Trabzon, Rize, and Samsun to take the place of the dead. 228 The mortality for Trabzon, therefore, must have been considerably greater than indicated in the table. The figures in Table 21, then, are actually undercounts of Muslim mortality in the east. Despite that, the catastrophic results of the Muslim-Armenian War speak for themselves: 62 percent of the Muslims of Van Vilâyeti lost, 42 percent of the Muslims of Bitlis, 31 percent of Erzurum.

TABLE 21. MUSLIM POPULATION LOSS IN THE OTTOMAN EASTERN PROVINCES, 1912-22.

ProvincePopulation LossPercentage Lost
Van194,1670.62
Bitlis169,2480.42
Erzurum248,6950.31
Diyarbakir158,0430.26
Mamuretülaziz89,3100.16
Sivas186,4130.15
Haleb*50,8380.09
Adana42,5110.07
Trabzon49,9070.04

* The portion that remained in the Turkish Rzepublic. SOURCE: McCarthy, Muslims and Minorities.

TABLE 22. TURKISH AND MUSLIM POPULATION LOSS IN THE TRANSCAUCASIAN REGION.*

Turks Muslims
Population in 19142,171,0002,743,000
Population in 19211,844,0002,330,000

* Baku, Elizavetpol, Kutais, Tiflis, Kars, and Erivan Russian provinces.
† Extrapolation from figures for Turks.
SOURCES: Russian and U.S.S.R. Statistics.


Muslim losses in the Caucasus, in which there was less actual warfare, were not as great as those in eastern Anatolia. Yet the mortality was surely significant -- 15 percent of the southern Caucasian Muslims were dead. In some areas, especially Kars, Erivan, Baku City, and western Azerbaijan, the mortality must have been much greater, but the type of statistics available makes it impossible to identify Muslim losses by provinces and districts. As in Anatolia, migration considerably clouds the picture.

The precise numbers of Muslim dead are not in themselves important; their importance lies in their depiction of the enormity of the Muslim loss in the east. In the provinces in which the war was primarily fought -- Van, Bitlis, and Erzurum -- at least 40 percent of the Muslims were dead at war's end. The depth and breadth of the suffering that such figures imply is beyond comprehension. The death rate is well beyond that of most of the great disasters in world history, such as the Thirty Years' War and the Black Death. Of course, Muslims were not the only ones to die. The Armenian death rate was at least as great, and Armenian losses cannot be ignored. But the world has long known of the suffering of the Armenians. It is time for the world to also consider the suffering of the Muslims of the east and the horror that it was. Like the Armenians, Muslims were massacred or died from starvation and disease in stupefying numbers. Like the Armenians, their deaths deserve remembrance.

Source
Book: Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922
Author: Justin McCarthy


Doğu'da Türk ve Müslüman Soykırım Sayıları


http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=5547 yazdı:KARS

Prior to the war, the city and province of Kars had been part of the Russian Empire. After the Russian Revolution of 1917, many of the Armenians of Kars Province had emigrated to the southern Caucasus, fleeing the Ottoman advance. Muslims who had earlier fled the province returned. The Muslims of Kars had unquestionably been a majority before the war. 154 Upon the Ottoman defeat, they formed a Muslim National Council (the Shura) in Kars Province. The British, who began a de facto occupation of Kars on 19 April 1919, gave civil and military power in the province to the Armenians, because it was expected that Kars would become part of the new Armenian Republic; 155 the Muslim majority was not consulted on this issue. Muslims were disarmed and their weapons given to Armenians, so that in effect the only armed forces in the province were Armenian bands and some Kurdish tribes.

TABLE 14. POPULATION OF KARS PROVINCE IN 1897, BY RELIGION

Religion Population Proportion
Orthodox49,2950.17
Armenian*72,9670.251
Roman Catholic4,3730.015
Other Christian16,9630.058
Jewish1,2040.004
Muslim145,8520.502
Total290,654

* Gregorian and Armenian Catholic.
SOURCE: 1897 Russian Census.


Muslims began to be massacred even before the British had left Kars. On 19 April, the band of the Armenian "Karch Murat" dragged 7 Muslims from a train on the Kars line and killed them. Because the British were still present, a board of enquiry was set up and Karch Murat and his band convicted, but no one would or could arrest them. The crimes in Kars continued in this vein -plunder, robbery, devastation, and murder. In July 1919, the Armenian army began to attack and destroy the Muslim villages of the Karakurt-Sarikamş region with artillery and machine guns. The village of Büyük Şatak was destroyed and five Muslims were killed. Thirteen villages were devastated in the SaǧlŞk District, and 25 villages in the Horosan District. Large numbers of Muslim-owned sheep and cattle were confiscated.

The slaughter of Muslims in the Kars district was mostly contained in the agricultural areas of the province, the areas inhabited by Turkish speakers. Armenian bands plundered Turkish villages between Kars and Oltu and plundered Akqakale, Babirguend, and other towns and villages. Sixty Muslims of Kaǧzman were killed by Armenians, as were the Muslims of the village Puzant. The Turks of Iǧdir were either led away by armed bands or killed. Ali Riza, the Turkish governor of Kaǧzman, compiled a list of villages pillaged by Armenians after the Muslim National Assembly in Kars was dissolved: Digur 63; Kaǧzman 45; Karakorun 45; Sarikamş 46; and many more. Ali Riza also cited the names of the leaders of the Armenian bands -- 68 names in all. A formal Turkish Commission of Inquiry sent to the areas of Shuregel and Zarshat to investigate Armenian atrocities listed the houses destroyed in each village ("45 in Shurgel, 60 in Agnatch, 70 in Ilanli. . . ."). The crimes reported were sadly typical of what had been seen often in eastern Anatolia and the Caucasus -- villages pillaged and burned, flocks and belongings taken, rapes and murders. Nowhere on the Kars plain, or in the Erivan region to its north were Muslim villages safe. Individual murders and pillaging of Turks living on the plain by Armenians and sometimes Greeks were frequent. However, the mountainous areas of the province were defended by Kurdish tribes, who kept the Armenian forces from going too far beyond the plains and the cities. Kurds and Armenians fought what can only be called a blood feud -- each murdering any of the other who fell into their hands. Perhaps the only Western observer to actually see the situation, the British Colonel Rawlinson, reported that caravans of Muslim refugees were constantly leaving the Kars plain. He recorded reports of torture as well as murder, which he investigated and found to be accurate. Kars was also the scene of terrible suffering for Muslim refugees from Erivan Province and other areas designated as Armenian. Twenty-five thousand refugees from those areas were gathered in the Kars region in 1919. Many of these refugees were set upon by Armenian bands and soldiers in Kars province. Many were killed at Sarikamş after they had fled from Armenian massacres and destruction of their villages. In a letter to King George of England the president of the Muslim meclis (assembly) of Kars, Ibrahim, described the situation emotionally, portraying the Armenians as those "who completely destroyed and ruined more than 1,000 Mohammedan villages in the south west of the Caucasus [including the Kars region], who shed the blood of about 100,000 innocent Mohammedan women and children, and who have left neither honour nor property unspoiled and untouched."

Colonel Rawlinson came to the same conclusions regarding Armenian actions and intentions:

I had received further very definite information of horrors that had been committed by the Armenian soldiery in Kars Plain, and as I had been able to judge of their want of discipline by their treatment of my own detached parties, I had wired to Tiflis from Zivin that "in the interests of humanity the Armenians should not be left in independent command of the Moslem population, as, their troops being without discipline and not being under effective control, atrocities were constantly being committed, for which we [the British, who gave Kars to the Armenians] should with justice eventually be held to be morally responsible."

Source
Book: Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922
Author: Justin McCarthy


Kars ve Ermeni Faaliyetleri


http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=5556 yazdı:THE REPORT OF NILES AND SUTHERLAND

Few outsiders saw the situation in eastern Anatolia immediately after World War I. Of those who did, one group, American missionaries, were almost completely unreliable as witnesses to Muslim suffering. With the Armenians gone from eastern Anatolia, the life work of the missionaries had been destroyed, and their one-sidedness and understandable bitterness made them unreliable observers. While they were capable of documenting in great detail actions against Armenians, they were with few exceptions incapable of mentioning actions against Muslims. Another group, Westerners, were agents of the British and American governments, suffered from some of the same disabilities as the missionaries, and were also prejudiced. Some of them, however, rose above their prejudices to become accurate observers.

Captain Emory Niles and Mr. Arthur Sutherland were Americans ordered by the United States government to investigate the situation in eastern Anatolia. Their report was to be used as the basis for granting of relief aid by the American Committee for Near East Relief (ACNRE, more usually "Near East Relief"). The two men were quite unusual. Like Lt. Dunn, who provided Admiral Bristol with much accurate intelligence, Niles and Sutherland decided simply to ride through the area until they saw what was needed. Also, like Dunn, they did it with a minimum of support and with great courage. Their courage extended to their report, for they set down what they actually saw and heard, not what their prejudices dictated to them. For Americans in Anatolia, this was a rare phenomenon. The remarkable fact is that they were concerned about Muslims, not as Muslims but as human beings who were in need of relief. Perhaps naively, they assumed that their orders covered reporting all those in eastern Anatolia who were in need of relief, not only Christians, and they did so. Most of those in need were Muslims, and the suffering they reported was mainly Muslim suffering. It may be for that reason that their report was never included in the papers of the American Investigation Commissions; only a partial copy of it can be found in the American Archives, well-hidden among documents on very different topics, luckily not destroyed, but only buried. In most cases, Niles and Sutherland simply reported what they saw, without comment.

However, as they began to observe what was actually happening, they also began to change what had been their typical Western opinions about Turks and Armenians:

[Region from Bitlis through Van to Bayazit] In this entire region we were informed that the damage and destruction had been done by the Armenians, who, after the Russians retired, remained in occupation of the country, and who, when the Turkish army advanced, destroyed everything belonging to the Musulmans. Moreover, the Armenians are accused of having committed murder, rape, arson and horrible atrocities of every description upon the Musulman population. At first we were most incredulous of these stories, but we finally came to believe them, since the testimony was absolutely unanimous and was corroborated by material evidence. For instance, the only quarters left at all intact in the cities of Bitlis and Van are the Armenian quarters, as was evidenced by churches and inscriptions on the houses, while the Musulman quarters were completely destroyed. Villages said to have been Armenian were still standing, whereas Musulman villages were completely destroyed.

Niles and Sutherland were not pro-Turkish or pro-Muslim observers. On the contrary, they came to eastern Anatolia with all the usual American prejudices in place. Although they had never seen evidence of Muslim massacres of Armenians, they believed them to have taken place and to have been as awful as was commonly believed in the West. They commented, "We believe that it is incontestable that the Armenians were guilty of crimes of the same nature against the Turks as those of which the Turks are guilty against the Armenians." The difference, of course, is that they had seen the evidence of the Armenian crimes, not the Turkish-the one charge is based on evidence, the other on hearsay. However, this makes it more reliable concerning what they actually saw, because, despite their prejudices, they reported the evils perpetrated by Armenians.
The two Americans reported on the condition of eastern Anatolia after the war. The picture they painted was of a desolate place where crops, houses, and human lives had been destroyed. In the area between Erzurum and Bayazit, they found that the surviving Muslims had no milk, meat, or grain. The Muslims lived on wild grain and wild vegetables, "neither of which has much food value."

The Muslims blamed their fate on the Armenians and the Americans agreed:

In this region [Bayazit- Erzurum] the racial situation is intensely aggravated by the proximity to the frontier of Armenia, from which refugees are coming with stories of massacres, cruelty and atrocities carried on by the Armenian Government, Army and people against the Musulman population. Although several hundred Armenians are actually living in the vilayet of Van, it would seem impossible that Armenians could live in the rural regions of the vilayet of Erzerum, since the utmost hatred of them is manifested by all. Here also the Armenians before retiring ruined villages, carried out massacres, and perpetrated every kind of atrocity upon the Musulman population and the doings of the Armenians just over the frontier keep alive and active the hatred of the Armenians, a hatred that seems to be at least smoldering in the region of Van. That there are disorders and crimes in Armenia is confirmed by refugees from Armenia in all parts of the region and by a British officer at Erzerum.

In the region between Erzurum and the Armenian frontier, the destruction had been nearly complete. Retreating Armenians had destroyed every possible village on their line of retreat. Twothirds of the housing had been destroyed, as had most of the Muslim population: "The region 218 has between one-third and one-fourth of its former population, varying in certain districts. Those cities and villages on the line of retreat of the Armenian army suffered most."

"All the villages and towns through which we passed showed the marks of the war. Most of them were completely ruined."

The most eloquent evidence given by Niles and Sutherland was statistical -- enumerations of surviving Muslim villages and houses. In considering Van and Bitlis, for example, they found that in 1919 both cities had 10 percent or less of their pre-war population. The Armenians had destroyed all but a few Muslim houses (Table 19). All the public buildings and Muslim religious structures were gone.

Source
Book: Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922
Author: Justin McCarthy


TABLE 19. DESTRUCTION IN THE CITIES OF VAN AND BITLIS.

Houses before wars"August 1919"
VanMuslim3,4003
Armenian3,1001,170
BitlisMuslim6,500--
Armenian1,5001,000

SOURCE:Niles and Sutherland.

A similar situation was found in other villages. Most Muslim villages were simply gone, whereas Armenian villages had survived. Niles and Sutherland gave examples from the vilxâyet of Van and the sancak of Bayazit ( Table 20 ).

TABLE 20. VILLAGES IN VAN VILÁYETI AND BAYAZIT SANCAǧI, BEFORE AND AFTER THE WAR AND ARMENIAN OCCUPATION

VANBAYAZIT
Before wars"August 1919"Before wars"August 1919"
Muslim1,373350*448243
Armenian112200†3333
Mixed187
Total1,672550481276

* Repaired with materials from other villages.
† Both Armenian and mixed villages.
SOURCE: Niles and Sutherland.


Although they did not see the Caucasus nor have first-hand knowledge of the fate of Muslims in the territories that had been Russian, Niles and Sutherland repeatedly heard the same stories of atrocities from refugees and Muslims of the border regions. Judging partly on what they had seen in Anatolia, they believed the tales to be true.

It was at Bayazid that Musulman refugees from the Caucasus made their strongest appeal on account of atrocities committed by Armenians upon them and those Musulmans who remain. The notes taken at the time show what the Armenians are doing now in the Caucasus and what they did at Bayazid during their occupation. There is a most intense bitterness and thirst for revenge against the Armenians here.

Niles and Sutherland accurately summarized the history of the eastern Anatolian Muslims in the conclusion of their report:

Although it does not fall within the exact scope of our investigation one of the most salient facts impressed on us at every point from Bitlis to Trebizond was that in the region which we traversed the Armenians committed upon the Turks all the crimes and outrages which were committed in other regions by Turks upon Armenians. At first we were most incredulous of the stories told us, but the unanimity of the testimony of all witnesses, the apparent eagerness with which they told of wrongs done them, their evident hatred of Armenians, and, strongest of all, the material evidence on the ground itself, have convinced us of the general truth of the facts, first, that Armenians massacred Musulmans on a large scale with many refinements of cruelty, and second that the Armenians are responsible for most of the destruction done to towns and villages. The Russians and Armenians occupied the country for a considerable time together in 1915 and 1916, and during this period there was apparently little disorder, although doubtless there was damage committed by the Russians. In 1917 the Russian Army disbanded and left the Armenians alone in control. At this period bands of Armenian irregulars roamed the country pillaging and murdering the Musulman civilian population. When the Turkish army advanced at Erzindjan, Erzerum, and Van, the Armenian army broke down and all of the soldiers, regular and irregular, turned themselves to destroying Musulman property and committing atrocities upon Musulman inhabitants. The result is a country completely ruined, containing about one-fourth of its former population and one-eighth of its former buildings, and a most bitter hatred of Musulmans for Armenians which makes it impossible for the two races to live together at the present time. The Musulmans protest that if they are forced to live under an Armenian Government, they will fight, and it appears to us that they will probably carry out this threat. This view is shared by Turkish officers, British officers, and Americans whom we have met.

Niles ve Sutherland'ın Raporu


http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=5550 yazdı:ERİVAN AND NAHCİVAN

[Admiral Bristol] I know from reports of my own officers who served with General Dro that defenseless villages were bombarded and then occupied, and any inhabitants that had not run away were brutally killed, the village pillaged, and all the livestock confiscated, and then the village burned. This was carried out as a regular systematic gettingrid of the Moslems.

Before the war, the Muslims of Erivan Province constituted almost as large a population as the Armenians. They were among those of the Caucasus who most suffered. Evidence from Erivan, however, was fragmentary. Refugees brought out reports of villages burned and massacred, but few first-hand reports by others were available. The Ottoman or Turkish Nationalist armies never entered much of Erivan Province, so the Ottomans made few detailed reports on Erivan's Muslims. The Muslim Council of Kars compiled a list of destroyed Muslim villages in part of Erivan, probably from refugee reports, which detailed by name and mortality the villages destroyed by 1 October 1919 -- 91 villages destroyed in two districts alone. The Turkish government stated that 199 Muslim villages in the Armenian Republic had been destroyed, probably not much of an exaggeration. In March of 1920, the Republic officially protested the massacres in the Armenian Republic, listing by name the villages destroyed and estimating that the Armenian state "had devastated more than 300 villages and massacred the most part of the Mussulmans populating these villages." Even the Persian government, which was not given to complaint because it was largely under the control of occupying British soldiers, spoke out against the slaughter.

However, the most telling criticism came from Armenians, the Socialist-Revolutionary Party of the Armenian Republic:

To the President of the Parliament [of the Armenian Republic].

We beg you to announce to the Minister for Home Affairs the following demand: Is the Minister informed that during the last three weeks on the territory of the Armenian Republic within the boundaries of the Echmiadzin, Erivan and Sourmalin districts a series of Tatar villages, for instance Pashakend, Takiarli, Kouroukh-Giune, Oulalik of the Taishouroukh Society, Agveren, Dalelar, Pourpous, Alibek of the Arzakend Society, Djan-Fida, Kerim-Arch, Agdjar, Igdalou, Karkhoun, Kelani-Aroltkh of the Echmiadzin district as well as a series of other villages have been cleared of the Tatar population and have been exposed to robbery and massacre. That the local police not only did not prevent but even took part in these robberies and massacres, that these events left a very bad impression on the local population which is disgusted with these robberies and disorders and who wish to live in peace with their neighbors and request that the guilty be accordingly judged and punished as they are to this day left unpunished.

The Armenian Socialist Revolutionaries had complained of the massacres both in the Parliament and in their newspaper, The Revolutionary Banner.

Although, as might be expected, their evidence tended to lay blame solely on their political opponents, the Dashnak Party in power, their evidence completely supported the contentions of the Azerbaijan government.

The Nahcivan region, in the south of the Russian Erivan Province, had the misfortune to be the site of the main railroad line that connected Armenia to Iran and further east. The Armenian Republic decided not only that it must hold the railroad line, but that the line would never be secure as long as the region through which it passed was almost totally Turkish in population. Therefore, it was decided to rid the entire line of the railroad of adjacent and nearby Turkish villages, which were destroyed by Armenian regular troops. The Armenians attacked Muslim villages with artillery and machine guns, as they had earlier near Sarikamş. Armenian partisan bands assisted in the attacks on the Turkish villages. For example, a large Armenian band of perhaps 1,200 attacked the villages of Elmah (688 reported dead) and Aǧuşma (516 dead), among others in the Nahcivan region. The villagers were either killed or forced to flee to Azerbaijan or Turkey.

Admiral Bristol summarized the events and laid political blame for the tragedy:

The Armenian government, with its regular forces, attempted to clear the Tatars away from a railroad for twenty-seven miles and this has caused Tatar refugees to the extent of many thousands. This is similar to the Greek operations in the Vilayet of Aydin. It will also be noted that the British, in encouraging the Armenians, did not act according to the principles of humanity or self-determination. They were party to a plan to conquer another race and place the minority to govern a majority when they must have known full well that the minority was not capable of governing itself, not to mention providing government for the majority.

It was the Armenian attacks that actually cemented the resolve of the Azerbaijanis to form an army and defend the Turks. They eventually made a stand and held the Armenians, but not until the "twenty-seven miles" of villages had been lost.

TABLE 15. TURKS IN ERIVAN PROVINCE, 1914 AND 1926

270,000"Turco-Tatars" in 1914*
89,000in 1926
181,000Lost (67%)

*Adjusted to postwar boundaries.
SOURCES: 1915 Russian Statistical Yearbook and 1926 U.S.S.R. Census.


The best evidence on the massacres and forced deportations of the Muslims of Erivan comes from population statistics taken before and after the wars. Table 15 presents figures for the population of Turks (called "Turco-Tatars" in the Russian statistics) in Erivan before and after the wars. All Muslims are not included in the table, because the 1926 U.S.S.R. census did not give population by religion, and Muslim ethnic groups other than Turks were not specifically listed in the 1914 figures. The non-Turkish Muslims in Erivan can be assumed to have suffered as badly as did the Turks.

From the beginning of the First World War until the first postwar census, two-thirds of the Muslims had disappeared from Erivan Province. Many of these were refugees and many of them died. Erivan Province, which had begun as a majority Muslim province in the 1820s, had only a small Muslim minority at the beginning of the 1920s.

Erivan, Nahcivan ve Ermeni Faaliyetleri


http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=5548 yazdı:AZERBAIJAN, BAKU, AND ELIZAVETPOL

Baku felt the effect of the Russian Revolution of 1917 more quickly and more completely than other areas of the Caucasus. Workers in the oil industry and Armenians of the town were ripe for Bolshevik and Armenian nationalist revolutionary organization. Baku was thus ruled by an uneasy alliance of a Soviet revolutionary committee and Armenian Dashnaks. Such a combination worked against the Azeri Turks (or, in the Russian usage, Tatars) of the city, who were neither Armenian nor Bolshevik sympathizers. From 30 March to 1 April 1918, the Tatars were attacked. Almost half of the Muslim population of Baku was compelled to flee the city.

Between 8,000 and 12,000 Muslims were killed in Baku alone. On the night of 14 September 1918 as the Armenian forces had retreated from the city, local Muslims took their revenge and killed almost 9,000 Armenians. Turkish troops entered the city on 16 September, restored order, and protected the remaining Armesnians.

Armenian troops who entered territory claimed by the Azerbaijan Republic destroyed all Muslim villages in their path.

As Richard Hovannisian has written of one guerrilla leaders, Andranik:

The routes south were blocked by regular Turkish divisions. Backtracking, [the Armenian guerilla leader and general] Andranik then pushed over Nakhichevan into Zangezur, the southernmost uezd of the Elisavetpol guberniia. Remaining there for the duration of the world war, Andranik's forces crushed one Tatar village after another.

The Azerbaijani population was forced to feed and house, when they could, approximately 60,000 refugees who had fled into their territory by the end of 1919. Admiral Bristol, the American plenipotentiary in Istanbul, basing himself on the reports of the American representatives in the Caucasus, stated that the 60,000 refugees had come from 420 Muslim villages destroyed by the Armenians.

American intelligence operatives and diplomatic representatives reported the usual sequence in which Armenian troops attacked Turkish villagers, often killed them, and forced them to flee, in response to which the government of Azerbaijan was sometimes able to respond. The Armenian Prime Minister stated to H. V. Bryan, American Liaison Officer to the Allied High Commission in Armenia, that the Armenian army was busy surrounding Turkish villages and "starving them into submission." The attacks were partly due to the desire of the Armenians for more extensive and secure boundaries and access to the railroad running through primarily Turkish-inhabited lands, and partly due to traditional hatreds that had surfaced in 1905. Whatever the reason, the result was that Turks were forcibly removed from their villages or killed. In London, Curzon told an eminent Armenian delegation of the "foolish and indefensible conduct of their compatriots on north-eastern frontiers of Armenia." Curzon quoted to them lists of outrages committed, which showed the Armenians had been much the worse offenders.

Source
Book: Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922
Author: Justin McCarthy


Azerbaycan, Bakü, Elizavetpol ve Ermeni Faaliyetleri


http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=5540 yazdı:BAYBURT

The events in Bayburt were similar to those in Erzincan. As in Erzincan, Armenian guerrillas (under their leader, Arshak) ordered the people of the surrounding region into the city. However, the Muslims had heard of the very recent events 93 in Erzincan; they fled to the mountains. Bayburt itself was largely destroyed by Armenians forced to retreat before the Ottoman advance of 1918. Before they could leave, Armenian gangs gathered 250 Muslims into the central prison and murdered them. Approximately 400 buildings in the town were burnt down. When Ottoman troops arrived, they found an additional 200 corpses hastily buried or lying in the streets. More than 600 Muslims may have been killed.

ERZURUM

The position of the Turks in the city of Erzurum had been relatively good, at least when compared to other areas of the Ottoman East, until the breakup of Russian authority in the city. As Russian rule ended, the Turks began to experience at first indignities at the hands of the Armenians, then abduction and theft, and finally rape and murder. Turks were attacked in the streets and were little safer from roving Armenian bands in their homes.

The final massacre of Muslims in Erzurum began on 10 February 1918. On that day, a large number of Muslims were taken under the pretext of corveé labor, then were robbed and killed before the Kars Gate, which led out of the city of Erzurum. In the town itself, houses were broken into, pillaged, and burned, and thousands were killed. Ottoman authorities estimated 8,000 killed in and around the city. They described Erzurum as "a city of ruins."

It is probable that the rapid advance of the Ottoman army saved Erzurum from greater misfortunes. When units of the Ottoman army entered Erzurum, they found thousands of corpses of Muslims murdered by Armenians. Between the retaking of the city, on 12 March 1918 and 20 March, Ottoman soldiers had counted 2,127 male bodies and were continuing the enumeration and search. These were only the male bodies found in the city limits and counted in the first 8 days after the Ottoman entry into the city, only a portion of those killed.

KARS

Prior to the war, the city and province of Kars had been part of the Russian Empire. After the Russian Revolution of 1917, many of the Armenians of Kars Province had emigrated to the southern Caucasus, fleeing the Ottoman advance. Muslims who had earlier fled the province returned. The Muslims of Kars had unquestionably been a majority before the war. 154 Upon the Ottoman defeat, they formed a Muslim National Council (the Shura) in Kars Province. The British, who began a de facto occupation of Kars on 19 April 1919, gave civil and military power in the province to the Armenians, because it was expected that Kars would become part of the new Armenian Republic; 155 the Muslim majority was not consulted on this issue. Muslims were disarmed and their weapons given to Armenians, so that in effect the only armed forces in the province were Armenian bands and some Kurdish tribes.

TABLE 14. POPULATION OF KARS PROVINCE IN 1897, BY RELIGION

Religion Population Proportion
Orthodox49,2950.17
Armenian*72,9670.251
Roman Catholic4,3730.015
Other Christian16,9630.058
Jewish1,2040.004
Muslim145,8520.502
Total290,654

* Gregorian and Armenian Catholic.
SOURCE: 1897 Russian Census.


Muslims began to be massacred even before the British had left Kars. On 19 April, the band of the Armenian "Karch Murat" dragged 7 Muslims from a train on the Kars line and killed them. Because the British were still present, a board of enquiry was set up and Karch Murat and his band convicted, but no one would or could arrest them. The crimes in Kars continued in this vein -plunder, robbery, devastation, and murder. In July 1919, the Armenian army began to attack and destroy the Muslim villages of the Karakurt-Sarikamş region with artillery and machine guns. The village of Büyük Şatak was destroyed and five Muslims were killed. Thirteen villages were devastated in the SaǧlŞk District, and 25 villages in the Horosan District. Large numbers of Muslim-owned sheep and cattle were confiscated.

The slaughter of Muslims in the Kars district was mostly contained in the agricultural areas of the province, the areas inhabited by Turkish speakers. Armenian bands plundered Turkish villages between Kars and Oltu and plundered Akqakale, Babirguend, and other towns and villages. Sixty Muslims of Kaǧzman were killed by Armenians, as were the Muslims of the village Puzant. The Turks of Iǧdir were either led away by armed bands or killed. Ali Riza, the Turkish governor of Kaǧzman, compiled a list of villages pillaged by Armenians after the Muslim National Assembly in Kars was dissolved: Digur 63; Kaǧzman 45; Karakorun 45; Sarikamş 46; and many more. Ali Riza also cited the names of the leaders of the Armenian bands -- 68 names in all. A formal Turkish Commission of Inquiry sent to the areas of Shuregel and Zarshat to investigate Armenian atrocities listed the houses destroyed in each village ("45 in Shurgel, 60 in Agnatch, 70 in Ilanli. . . ."). The crimes reported were sadly typical of what had been seen often in eastern Anatolia and the Caucasus -- villages pillaged and burned, flocks and belongings taken, rapes and murders. Nowhere on the Kars plain, or in the Erivan region to its north were Muslim villages safe. Individual murders and pillaging of Turks living on the plain by Armenians and sometimes Greeks were frequent. However, the mountainous areas of the province were defended by Kurdish tribes, who kept the Armenian forces from going too far beyond the plains and the cities. Kurds and Armenians fought what can only be called a blood feud -- each murdering any of the other who fell into their hands. Perhaps the only Western observer to actually see the situation, the British Colonel Rawlinson, reported that caravans of Muslim refugees were constantly leaving the Kars plain. He recorded reports of torture as well as murder, which he investigated and found to be accurate. Kars was also the scene of terrible suffering for Muslim refugees from Erivan Province and other areas designated as Armenian. Twenty-five thousand refugees from those areas were gathered in the Kars region in 1919. Many of these refugees were set upon by Armenian bands and soldiers in Kars province. Many were killed at Sarikamş after they had fled from Armenian massacres and destruction of their villages. In a letter to King George of England the president of the Muslim meclis (assembly) of Kars, Ibrahim, described the situation emotionally, portraying the Armenians as those "who completely destroyed and ruined more than 1,000 Mohammedan villages in the south west of the Caucasus [including the Kars region], who shed the blood of about 100,000 innocent Mohammedan women and children, and who have left neither honour nor property unspoiled and untouched."

Colonel Rawlinson came to the same conclusions regarding Armenian actions and intentions:

I had received further very definite information of horrors that had been committed by the Armenian soldiery in Kars Plain, and as I had been able to judge of their want of discipline by their treatment of my own detached parties, I had wired to Tiflis from Zivin that "in the interests of humanity the Armenians should not be left in independent command of the Moslem population, as, their troops being without discipline and not being under effective control, atrocities were constantly being committed, for which we [the British, who gave Kars to the Armenians] should with justice eventually be held to be morally responsible."

Source
Book: Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922
Author: Justin McCarthy


Erzurum ve Ermeni Faaliyetleri

Bayburt ve Ermeni Faaliyetleri

Kars ve Ermeni Faaliyetleri


FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT THE TRUTH REGARDING THE ARMENIAN SLANDER, PLEASE HAVE A LOOK AT THE SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES LOCATED AT THE FOLLOWING PAGES TO ENLIGHTEN YOURSELF:

Ermeni Tehciri ve Terörist Ülke Ermenistan

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:The Ottoman empire was not a democracy. It was a despotic regime. Even Kemal Ataturk claimed that the Turkish state waged war against the Ottoman empire and liberated Turkey from the Sultans' yoke!!!


My Father Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, seperates two periods of the Ottoman Empire, the rise and the fall periods. During the fall period, the final Ottoman sultans were traitors and were puppets of the British Empire. I never said there was a democracy in the Ottoman Empire system, but the fact is for sure that the Ottoman Empire gave more rights to the PEOPLE OF FOREIGN ETHNIC ORIGIN, than they gave to their OWN PEOPLE WITH TURK ORIGIN. This shows the Ottoman Empire was never RACIST, and they NEVER COMMITTED ANY KIND OF GENOCIDE!

By the way, which Middle Age country or empire was democratic? Not even one, maybe France temporarily with Napoleon Bonaparte, but this is so late in the beginning of the 19th century. Except this, which country or empire was NOT RULED WITH A ROYAL FAMILY? No one, so to only accuse the Ottoman Empire being not democratic is only related with your hate crime feelings against us Turks. The fact is that neither the British Empire, nor the Tsar Russia was democratic, both were ruled by royal families. IN FACT, while the modern Türkiye is being ruled with a democratic system, the UK and the US are still ruled in a non democratic Middle Age monarchy system. Not to forget that a system with only one president, is equal to monarchy. And have a look at the other modern present day Western European countries like the Netherlands, all being ruled with a "king" or a "queen" at the top, is this a democratic system? No, of course not!

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:There was no direct order from Hitler or anybody else to gas the Jews in the gas chambers. So what?


Are you serious, or joking, i hope you are joking, because i am starting to have the feeling that taking you serious until now, has been a complete waste of time. Altough all of these low quality messages of the Turk hating members on this forum, my arguments obviously have shown what the truth is about the subject. In my next posts, i will not waste my time on such ignorant posts claiming that Hitler did not order directly anyone to the gas chambers, i will just simply skip these simple trolling comments, just to give you guys a warning from the beginning :)

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:Even Perincek accepted that there were massacres against the Armenians.


I never did deny there was no massacres committed against the Armenians. In fact, there were mutual massacres committed, but the Armenians and their masters(Tsar Russians and the British) were the one committing the GENOCIDES. In case you did not know, the term "massacre" is not equal to the term "genocide". You obviously did not read my previous messages, read them before you twist my messages. The Ottoman state did not have such a genocide/massacre policy, and the Ottoman state sentenced hundreds of Muslim Turks and Kurds who made personal revenge killings on the Ottoman territories against civil Armenians. I guess you know what revenge killings are, these are the personal killings done by Muslim Turks and Kurds of whom family members where massacred by the Armenians, whom were being used by the British and Tsar Russian Empires. By the way, not to forget the fact that it was the 1st World War, and the Ottoman Empire and the Turks were being invaded by several states and terrorist organizations like the Greek and Armenian terrorist organizations. We Turks were being invaded, and our enemies conducted genocide on our people, and we defended our country, and forced all enemies to flee out of the country, and won our independency with the Turk War of Independence. Only the bad intended people with DENIAL STRESS PROBLEMS do not have the competency to understand these simple facts, i advise those people to see a doctor and medicate yourself, maybe you will find your soul :)

To make an off topic comment, i hope the members of the European Court of Human Rights associated with this case, will read the arguments used in this topic and the links provided in this topic. After all of these very strong arguments, i am sure they will be 100% convinced about the FACT THAT the Armenian Slander is a bad intended political material being used by the US state to put pressure to the FULLY INDEPENDENT TÜRKİYE OF THE TÜRKS. The US knows they can not beat the Turk Armed Forces with a military battle, therefore they feel the urge, to conduct a psychological warfare against the Turks, about the subjects of which the truth is so obviously clear. But we must accept that the US controls the international media and they spend many budgets for their international online trolls, thats why they have power in the spreading of their simple but bad intended NON SCIENTIFIC LIES. But, the real Atatürkists like myself will battle against this type(or other types) of warfare forever, dont worry about it.
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Re: Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 08 Tem 2015, 01:00

Vladimir Putin yazdı:Uighur rights my ass. That's all the Empire of Chaos trying to destabilize China and block the Silk Road. Turkey'd be very stupid for buying it, not to mention that Turkey has a well-known historical in massacring their own Christian minorities.


Which historical facts? Are you talking about the non scientific LIES the US and Russia is spreading?

We Turks do not care for the intentions of both Russia and the US! Uygurs are of Turk origin, and anyone harming the Uygurs will find the Turks from Türkiye in front of them. Why is it so important when non Turk people gets massacred, and is it not important when there is an obvious genocide made against the Turks in East Turkistan? I say here with good intentions, we have respect for China standing up against the devilish US world economy, we support the independency of China, but if they continue to harm the Uygur Turks, we will do what is necessary to stop this genocide! The Turk Union is ready happen, neither Russia, nor the US, nor China can stop this noble union from happening. I advise the Chinese state and their police to be careful the next time you want to harm even one Turk in East Turkistan, because they will make an enemy of the Türkiye state whom is now your friend. China will be stronger, if they do not violate the rights(i am not talking about the rights regarding our Islamic traditions, i am talking about the violent unhuman police policy of the Chinese state) of the Uygur Turks in East Turkistan, stop the devilish sneaky genocide actions, or else it would end bad for you!

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showth ... ost3678349
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

Re: Türk Düşmanları İle Ön-Türk Tarihi Hakkında Bir Tartışma

Mesajgönderen TurkmenCopur » 08 Tem 2015, 01:26

zhaoyun yazdı:Turkey is enemies with almost all of it's neighbors. It's got a lot of problems to sort out first.


The real ruler of Türkiye is the Turk Armed Forces. The AKP who is responsible for making all these enemies is being get rid of by the Turk Armed Forces, a national Turk government is ready to rise in the close future. In the mean time, we Turks are well aware that the US is our real enemy. We also know that the US intelligence, dreams to divide China, just like they dream to divide Türkiye. For this reason, Türkiye and China should be allies, in stead of enemies. But, this has nothing to do with the fact that the Chinese police is killing randomly Turks in Xinjiang. If China goes further with the genocide committed on the Turks in the Xinjiang region, then they will make an enemy of China in the eyes of the Turk Nation. I advise the Chinese state to reconsider the police policy that is being conducted in Xinjiang, we will do what is necessary to stop the genocide on the Turks in East Turkistan.
Kullanıcı avatarı
TurkmenCopur
Genelkurmay Başkanı
Genelkurmay Başkanı
 
Mesajlar: 13983
Kayıt: 29 Eki 2010, 17:26

ÖncekiSonraki

Dön Ön Türk Tarihi Bölümü

Kimler çevrimiçi

Bu forumu gezen kullanıcılar: Hiç bir kayıtlı kullanıcı yok ve 0 misafir