Sunday, June 17, 2007


"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society."
~ Edward Bernays.

It looks like Newsweek doesn't have the cojones to put a journalist's name to its propaganda pieces, the most recent of which claims that PKK is losing support among Kurds in Turkish-occupied Kurdistan.

On what does Newsweek base its claim? Let's take a look:

Last week the streets of Sirnak and Diyarbakir were again full of demonstrators, many of them Kurds. But this time they were protesting not against the government, but against the very group that claims to fight for their rights—the Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK.

The Şirnex protest was mentioned here on Rastî last week. As Reuters reported, the protests were dominated by "state-paid village guards, civil servants and schoolchildren." It's also a fact well-known to Kurds that the Turkish regime forces people to turn out for regime demonstrations because they are threatened to do so by the regime. Since those regime-forced demonstrations took place, participation-by-threat was confirmed to me by offline sources in The Region.

On the same day of the regime-forced protests, a Turkish journalist in Amed for a conference on coups, democracy, and politics in Turkey discussed the fact that the Turkish military is behind all of the recent protests throughout Turkey. Links to that information was also contained in last week's Rastî post.

Of course, the brilliant, nameless investigative journalist from Newsweek unwittingly admits that the regime was behind the protests in Şirnex and Amed, and within the very same paragraph:

Most surprising of all, the protests were encouraged by the most hawkish institution in the country—the Turkish Army, which on the eve of the rallies called on all citizens "to demonstrate their collective opposition against the terrorist attacks."

Yes, most surprising of all is the fact that regime-forced happened immediately after the Turkish general staff posted an order online to the civilian population demanding protests. The sanitized English version of the order appeared in Hürriyet--sanitized because the regime didn't want anyone to pick up on the genocidal implications of the Genelkurmay's seven points.

Then the nameless journalist at Newsweek claims that PKK suddenly called a ceasefire on June 12 because it has lost its base of support:

The turnabout seemed to have a rapid impact. Last week the PKK abruptly announced a ceasefire in the wake of nationwide protests by Turks and Kurds alike against its latest campaign of violence. Previous ceasefires have crumbled.

You would think that an international publication like Newsweek would have the wherewithal to actually confirm the facts it uses to back up its claims, but clearly Newsweek does not. A thirty-second search of Google would have revealed the realities of the ceasefire, that the ceasefire went into effect on October 1, 2006, and therefore it was not an "abrupt" announcement. Such a search would have also turned up the fact that it was the US and Turkey who rejected the ceasefire out of hand days before it went into effect. Futhermore, if the cheap-assed editors at Newsweek actually owned an Internet connection, a little more digging would have revealed that the Turkish regime has refused all other unilateral PKK ceasefires offered in the thirty-odd years since PKK's founding, particularly during the 6-year ceasefire between 1999-2005.

I would also ask, if there are only "remnants" of PKK left, as Newsweek asserts, then why has the entire Middle East gone spastic over PKK's existence? The truth is that while PKK has its strongest support among the 20 million Kurds under Turkish occupation, it has always attracted Kurds from all parts of Kurdistan. With that in mind, it should be remembered that PKK is the only Kurdish organization that regularly dispatches dirty Iranian pasdarans, in a blaze of glory, to their eternal reward of virgins in paradise.

And now that I have mentioned PJAK, let me point out that a non-Newsweek propagandist has an article out on it. Soner Cagaptay of the neoconservative think tank, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, tries to make the case that PJAK is part of PKK. I guess some people don't believe it is, but here's what this "expert" says:

PJAK insists that it is distinct from the PKK, but interviews with its leaders and members, along with a look at its history, suggest that the two groups have similar ideologies and methodologies.

Bullshit. Cagaptay knows very well that PJAK is part of PKK because Cagaptay knows very well what Cemil Bayık had to say about that last year:

"If the US is interested in PJAK, then it has to be interested in the PKK as well," Bayik said. "The PKK is the one who formed PJAK, who established PJAK and supports PJAK."

So much for the "experts" at WINEP.

TIME is also running a little something on the PKK. Putting the superficiality of TIME's journalist aside, it does appear that HPG's headquarters command is putting the skids on the free access of journalists to Qendil. Well, American journalists, at least, and that may be because all the recent reporting about PKK has been nothing but propaganda in the service of the Ankara and Washington regimes. Since these "journalists" are nothing more than glorified propagandists, it's about time for them to be denied, along with all their phony arguments about getting the Kurdish cause into the MSM.

How many of them were interested enough in the cause to write about the Joseph Ralston/Lockheed Martin conflict of interest? If they are truly interested, let them learn Turkish and read Firat.

If anyone is interested in where the US is planning to establish its permanent Iraqi bases--14 in total--check out the Friends Committee on National Legislation to play with the interactive map.

Last, but certainly not least, Dr. Kristiina has her own post about the June 6 meeting in the House of Commons on the situation of Kurds in Turkey, which she attended. Take a look at Dr. Kristiina's blog, The Kurdish Question.


Anonymous said...

I wonder if you have any take on what Juan Cole wrote today:

"PKK Leader Warns Turkey on Incursions

Michael Howard of the Guardian interviewed a Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) guerrilla commander in northern Iraq. Money graf:

'The Turkish army faces "a political and military disaster" if its generals give orders for a cross-border offensive, Cemil Bayik, one of the two most powerful figures in the Kurdistan Workers party, or PKK, told the Guardian at a hideout in the Qandil mountains on the border with Iran. Mr Bayik said his units did not seek a fight, but "would defend ourselves if attacked". It could become "a quagmire for them [the Turkish army] and create space for Iran to interfere in Iraq also," he said. '

Bayik's mindset is revealed when he talks about Turkish plans of 'annihilating Kurdishness.' Actually, things have changed in the past 30 years, though the good Lord knows that much remains to be done in ensuring that Turkish Kurds are first class citizens (not a goal that will be reached by thuggish, murderous PKK tactics). First of all, Turkish Kurds have spread all over Turkey as guest workers. There are millions living in cities such as Istanbul and other industrial centers. Political scientists studying their voting patterns have found that they vote like other Turkish citizens living in the same place. That is, Kurds in Istanbul vote like the Turks in surrounding neighborhoods. There is no pan-Kurdish political identity in Turkey. Only a tiny proportion of Turkish Kurds supports the PKK, which has a very nasty history as a far-left terrorist group that killed thousands."

Have things changed in the last 30 years? Or is Cole yet another victim of Deep State propoganda?

Mizgîn said...

I always have the same take on everything that the nutty professor writes, Anonymous.

Juan Cole doesn't know shit about the founding ideology of the TC. If he did, he would know that the goal of the regime has been to annihilate the Kurdish people.

If the Turkish regime was only concerned about putting down rebellions, why did it slaughter a quarter of a million Kurds following the Şêx Seîd rebellion, which was relatively small and inefficient? Why the Resettlement Law of the 1930s? Why Law No. 1850, which made it legal to murder Kurds from the period June 20, 1930 to December 10, 1930?

Or how about something from another recent piece of anti-Kurd propaganda by the same nutty professor:

Barzani neglected to mention the 35,000 dead in PKK's dirty war, or that he is actively harboring 5,000 PKK guerrillas.

If we're to believe Juan Cole, there is something we must accept. Either PKK just popped out of nowhere and decided to fight for the hell of it, or Juan Cole has never heard of September 12 coup. I find it extremely difficult to believe that Cole has never heard of September 12 since, after all, it was HIS government that backed the coup. Prior to that coup, PKK was a political organization. It was America's coup in Turkey that fueled the Dirty War in more ways than one, but Cole NEVER mentions anything about that, does he? According to him, "Shit just happens."


I can't imagine the Turkish public standing for a massacre of Turkmen, and hundreds of thousands of people in the street could force Buyukanit to act decisively.

No, but Cole better be able to imagine the Turkish public standing for the massacre of a million Kurds in the last 80+ years, because that's exactly what's happened. And if Cole were familiar with the definition of genocide according to international law, he'd know that Turkey is guilty of genocide of Kurds . . . just as it is guilty of genocide of Armenians.

Oh, yeah, PKK has also apologized for the Kurdish role in the Armenian Genocide, something that Turkey has never done. Even the US doesn't recognize there ever was an Armenian Genocide. Nor does Israel.

So Cole is totally wrong to criticize Cuma for mentioning the annihilation of Kurdishness. That's been the single goal of the TC from Day 1. If a Kurd exists anywhere on earth, it means the foundation of the TC was a lie.

If Juan Cole is the know-it-all that everyone on the American left believes, then why does he say that there are 5,000 gerîlas in "Northern Iraq" when not even Erdoğan says that? Whoever knows the geography of Kurdistan knows that it's impossible for gerîlas at Qendil to race up to Dersim on foot, pull off an operation, and then race back to Qendil (so much for the "hot pursuit" bullshit). And it's very simple to figure out the distance if you know how to read and use a map--a skill which Juan Cole obviously lacks. But, if you know the geography, you know that the gerîlas cannot be in Dersim or Bingöl conducting operations and then back at Qendil for dinner.

Unless, of course, you believe in bilocation.

"Political scientists studying voting patterns, blah, blah, blah . . . " Which political scientists? Who are they? Where's the study? Do you know about census taking in Turkish-occupied Kurdistan? Kurds lie on the census. Think about that long and hard to see if you can figure out why that is.

And let's say, for the sake of argument, that all Kurds do vote like Turks and that there is no "pan-Kurdish identity" . . . maybe that's because there is no alternative.

What's been happening to DTP since the end of March, 2006? Did Juan Cole read the court transcripts of speeches Osman Baydemir gave during the Amed Serhildan and the crowd's reactions? So on what does Cole base his claim that "only a tiny proportion of Turkish Kurds supports the PKK?" Or is that more talking through his ass?

It appears that Cole just loves to talk about how violent PKK allegedly is. But he never says anything about any of the violence of the Ankara regime, does he? I mean, he's never said anything about the regime's violence. NEVER. Now I may not be some fancy effing professor who's grown roots in the sacred ivory tower of academe, but I know what reality is and I know who's done what to whom. And I can even dig up human rights reports to back it up.

Cole can't and that's why he never has. Check his record--he's NEVER breathed so much as a word about the thuggish, murderous regime tactics, tactics that will never reach the goal of peace.

Cole also fails to mention the ceasefire, not the current one and not any other. He doesn't mention the fact that the Ankara regime had 6 years in which to prove it's good intentions by repairing the severe damage that it inflicted on The Region and its people during the regime-sponsored Dirty War. In fact, as I said at the end of the Amed Serhildan, we are going back to the Dirty War, to the 1990s, and guess what? We have.

A former Clinton NATO commander is selling tactical fighter aircraft to Turkey at the rate of $13 billion under the cover of "special envoy to coordinate the PKK for Turkey," because, as everyone with half a brain cell knows, Turkey can't "coordinate the PKK" worth a damn. They couldn't capture Öcalan could they? They had to have the US and Israel, with the support of the international community, do that for them.

It was Clinton's former NATO commander who rejected the current ceasefire before it even went into effect. I guess peace is just not the way to sell military hardware.

(Notice that Cole doesn't mention anything at all about all those illegal weapons sales to Turkey over the years, especially during the Clinton administration.)

Nor does Cole mention PKK's Declaration for the Democratic Resolution of the Kurdish Question, the points of which are entirely consistent with the Copenhagen Criteria.

Imagine for a moment if it were Arabs or Persians being treated like Kurds by the Ankara regime. What would be Cole's reaction?

What Cole is doing is using Kurds as his own little pawns with which to bash the Bush administration, instead of bashing EVERY AMERICAN ADMINISTRATION for complicity in genociding Kurds of North Kurdistan. This is typical of the American left, or Democrats, or whatever the hell they all pretend to be. But make no mistake, there is no difference whatsoever among the Americans when it comes to Kurds. Using Kurds as pawns is what they ALL do, with the miniscule exception of the few individuals who have consistently spoken up for the cause of Kurdish justice.

The owner of DozaMe has already made an on-target assessment of people like Cole, in comments here:

The most disgusting fact is that people like him will only bash Turkey if it's related to Bush, and forgive Turkey for all its crimes against the Kurds when the Democrats come to power. And when the Democrats do come to power, they will join the anti-Kurdish crowd [Iran, Turkey and the whole Arab world] who are chanting "collaborators, collaborators!" Kurds seem to be the new "Israelis" of the block, ready to be blamed for everything evil in this world.

Has anything changed in the last 30 years? No.

Is Cole yet another victim of the Deep State? No. He's not a victim of the Deep State. He's a facilitator of the Deep State.