Sunday, June 28, 2009


"The sinews of war are infinite money."
~ Marcus Tullius Cicero.

Sibel Edmonds revisits the Ralston conflict of interest in her post titled, "Gate-Keepers of the Revolving Doors". She includes a statement from yours truly in which you will learn a little more about the difficulties Hevallo and I faced in trying to get the conflict of interest into the mainstream media (aka: state propaganda organs).

I also mentioned those journalists who did help to spread the news, but you'll have to check Sibel's post to see who they were. Feel free to leave your comments there. I'm sure Sibel would be happy to hear from you.

I am happy to note that the information Hevallo and I dug up is now included in old Joe's Wikipedia page, to his everlasting shame and that of the state propaganda organs that buried the information.

Since I'm on the subject of state propaganda organs, here's something else they "missed" which is extremely interesting about the 9/11 attacks. This is from an interview with a former FEMA videographer who is now living in Argentina under political asylum status:

Kurt Sonnenfeld graduated from the University of Colorado (USA) with studies in International Affairs and Economics, as well as in Literature and Philosophy. He worked for the United States government as official videographer and served as Director of Broadcast Operations for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)’s National Emergency Response Team. Additionally, Kurt Sonnenfeld was contracted by several other governmental agencies and programs for classified and “sensitive” operations at military and scientific installations throughout the United States.

On September 11, 2001, the area known as “Ground Zero” was sealed from the public eye. Sonnenfeld, however, was given unrestricted access enabling him to document for the investigation (that never took place) and provide some “sanitized” pool video to virtually every news network in the world. The tapes that reveal some of the anomalies which he discovered at Ground Zero are still in his possession.

[ . . . ]

Voltaire Network: What are your suspicions based on?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: There were many things, in hindsight, that were disturbing at Ground Zero. It was odd to me that I was dispatched to go to New York even before the second plane hit the South Tower, while the media was still reporting only that a “small plane” had collided with the North Tower — far too small of a catastrophe at that point to involve FEMA . FEMA was mobilized within minutes, whereas it took ten days for it to deploy to New Orleans to respond to Hurricane Katrina, even with abundant advance warning! It was odd to me that all cameras were so fiercely prohibited within the secured perimeter of Ground Zero, that the entire area was declared a crime scene and yet the “evidence” within that crime scene was so rapidly removed and destroyed. And then it was very odd to me when I learned that FEMA and several other federal agencies had already moved into position at their command center at Pier 92 on September 10th, one day before the attacks!

[ . . . ]

What happened with Building 7 is incredibly suspicious. I have video that shows how curiously small the rubble pile was, and how the buildings to either side were untouched by Building Seven when it collapsed. It had not been hit by an airplane; it had suffered only minor injuries when the Twin Towers collapsed, and there were only small fires on a couple of floors. There’s no way that building could have imploded the way it did without controlled demolition. Yet the collapse of Building 7 was hardly mentioned by the mainstream media and suspiciously ignored by the 911 Commission.

Voltaire Network: Reportedly, the underground levels of WTC7 contained sensitive and undoubtedly compromising archival material. Did you come across any of it?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: The Secret Service, the Department of Defense, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Internal Revenue Service, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Office of Emergency Management’s “Crisis Center” occupied huge amounts of space there, spanning several floors of the building. Other federal agencies had offices there as well. After September 11, it was discovered that concealed within Building Seven was the largest clandestine domestic station of the Central Intelligence Agency outside of Washington DC, a base of operations from which to spy on diplomats of the United Nations and to conduct counterterrorism and counterintelligence missions.

There was no underground parking level at Seven World Trade Center. And there was no underground vault. Instead, the federal agencies at Building Seven stored their vehicles, documents and evidence in the building of their associates across the street. Beneath the plaza level of US Customs House (Building 6) was a large underground garage, separated off from the rest of the complex’s underground area and guarded under tight security. This was where the various government services parked their bomb-proofed cars and armored limousines, counterfeit taxi cabs and telephone company trucks used for undercover surveillance and covert operations, specialized vans and other vehicles. Also within that secured parking area was access to the sub-level vault of Building 6.

When the North Tower fell, the US Customs House (Building 6) was crushed and totally incinerated. Much of the underground levels beneath it were also destroyed. But there were voids. And it was into one of those voids, recently uncovered, that I descended with a special Task Force to investigate. It was there we found the security antechamber to the vault, badly damaged. At the far end of the security office was the wide steel door to the vault, a combination code keypad in the cinderblock wall beside it. But the wall was cracked and partially crumbled, and the door was sprung partially open. So we checked inside with our flashlights. Except for several rows of empty shelves, there was nothing in the vault but dust and debris. It had been emptied. Why was it empty? And when could it have been emptied?

Voltaire Network: Is this what set alarm bells ringing for you?

Kurt Sonnenfeld: Yes, but not immediately. With so much chaos, it was difficult to think. It was only after digesting everything that the “alarm bells” went off.

Building Six was evacuated within twelve minutes after the first airplane struck the North Tower. The streets were immediately clogged with fire trucks, police cars and blocked traffic, and the vault was large enough, 15 meters by 15 meters by my estimate, to necessitate at least a big truck to carry out its contents. And after the towers fell and destroyed most of the parking level, a mission to recover the contents of the vault would have been impossible. The vault had to have been emptied before the attack.

I’ve described all of this extensively in my book, and it’s apparent that things of importance were taken out of harm’s way before the attacks. For example, the CIA didn’t seem too concerned about their losses. After the existence of their clandestine office in Building Seven was discovered, an agency spokesman told the newspapers that a special team had been dispatched to scour the rubble in search of secret documents and intelligence reports, though there were millions, if not billions of pages floating in the streets. Nevertheless, the spokesman was confident. “There shouldn’t be too much paper around,” he said.

And Customs at first claimed that everything was destroyed. That the heat was so intense that everything in the evidence safe had been baked to ash. But some months later, they announced that they had broken up a huge Colombian narco-trafficking and money-laundering ring after miraculously recovering crucial evidence from the safe, including surveillance photos and heat-sensitive cassette tapes of monitored calls. And when they moved in to their new building at 1 Penn Plaza in Manhattan, they proudly hung on the lobby wall their Commissioner’s Citation Plaque and their big round US Customs Service ensign, also miraculously recovered, in pristine condition, from their crushed and cremated former office building at the World Trade Center.

Now, the question you have to ask yourself is: Cui bono?

Saturday, June 27, 2009


"A mind once stretched by a new idea never regains its original dimensions."
~ Anonymous.

According to Bianet, the International Labor Organization (ILO), reports that a lot of kids in Turkey are working too many hours per week, especially the girls:

According to the report, Turkey is the third among the sixteen countries studied in terms of the hours that child labourers work. Only following Mali and Senegal, girls in Turkey aged 5-14 work around 30 hours a week, while boys work over 25 hours.

The average for the sixteen countries is 20.2 hours for girls and 19.2 hours for boys.

According to 2006 data, around one million children in Turkey are working.

[ . . . ]

A report published in Turkey on 11 June, produced by the Educatino Reform Initiative (ERG), there are 220,000 children aged 6 to 13 who are not registered for education in Turkey. Of these, 130,000 are girls, and 90,000 boys. Around 100,000 of the children not being educated are from central Anatolia and the southeast of the country. In addition, there are children who are not even registered as born, and have thus not been counted.

If a household is attached to a social security institution through work, this increases the probability of a child attending middle school (years 6-8) by 15 percent. However, around 54 percent of urban families have no steady income. This rate is at 84 percent in Gaziantep and 91 percent in Diyarbakır, in the southeast of the country.

At higher levels of schooling, the number of girls drop. While there are 96 girls to every 100 boys in primary 1, there are only 91 girls in 8th grade.

According to the child labour report of the Turkey Statistical Institute (TÜİK), six percent of Turkey's 6-17-year-old population is working. 66 percent of these are boys, and 34 percent girls. 41 percent work in agriculture, 28 in industyr, 23 in trade and 9 percent in the service industry.

Come on, now; it's been like this since agriculture arrived in Anatolia about 11,000 years ago. It's tradition! You can't just go messing with 11,000 years of tradition.

Besides, if you let the girls go to school, they'll get all uppity and stuff and might turn out like Eren Keskin or Emine Ayna, or Sebahat Tuncel, or Aysel Tuğluk, or something. Or they might get crazy ideas like the one that says they can shoot an AK47 just as well as the boys and then you'll have them all running off to the mountains like our guerrilla comrades, or something.

Besides, ignorance is bliss, right? Right??

Wednesday, June 24, 2009


"Power corrupts. Knowledge is power. Study hard. Be evil."
~ Anonymous.

I'd like to point out a few things for you to read, just in case you missed them.

First, at Children of the Sun there's a recent post updating us about the status of the trial of the state assassins who murdered Uğur Kaymaz and his father, Ahmet:

On 18 June 2009, the High Trubinal Court ruled that the police who shot Ugur from his back together with his father have acted in self defense. How is it acting in self defense, let alone being justifiable by any means, to shoot a child from behind at close range with 13 bullets? What kind of "law" would allow and tolerate such abomination?

Unfortunately, it's not surprising because the name of the game in Turkey always has been IMPUNITY:

Impunity means "exemption from punishment or loss".[1] In the international law of human rights, it refers to the failure to bring perpetrators of human rights violations to justice and, as such, itself constitutes a denial of the victims' right to justice and redress. Impunity is especially common in countries that lack a tradition of the rule of law, suffer from corruption or that have entrenched systems of patronage, or where the judiciary is weak or members of the security forces are protected by special jurisdictions or immunities.

Mmm, yeah, that's Turkey. For more, see Amnesty.

The second item is from Zerkesorg and is an interview with DTP's Emine Ayna. Comrade Emine is eminently Rastî-ful:

People don't change overnight. It's not like the Prime Minister and the President [of Turkey], while they were in denial yesterday, have changed overnight and said "okay let's accept it today". This is not about the Prime Minister and the President either. This is about the system.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Read the whole interview.

The third item I have for your consideration is a little something about government-narcotics relationships and how the MSM facilitates the cover-up of the truth about those relationships. If you don't know how this works, check Sibel Edmonds, another Rastî-ful woman who goes into the relationships of the CIA with the Latin American narcotics industry, the KLA and the narcotics industry,and Afghanistan and the narcotics industry. You'll find it all here.

Finally, with the global economic situation being what it is--thanks to the Wall Street vermin--many people are out of work with no prospects in the immediate future. Fear not, however, because it would appear that the US State Department has an opening . . . for a "viable" candidate for Iran. You can find a list of candidate qualifications and benefits here.

A couple of examples of past "viable" include one that most Rastî readers are familiar with--Tansu Çiller:

Former Prime Minister of Turkey, Ms. Tansu Ciller is a perfect example of a Middle Eastern leader who was selected, declared ‘viable,’ supported, promoted, installed, and protected by the United States. As can be seen Ms. Ciller met many if not all of the qualifications criteria listed above:

1. Ms. Ciller completed her advanced degrees in the United States - M.S. from the University of New Hampshire and PhD from the University of Connecticut. During this extended period while she resided in the US we had ample time and opportunity to train and mold her for the leadership position in Turkey.

2. Ms. Ciller was granted citizenship in the United States. In order to keep this fact from tarnishing her image during her candidacy campaign in Turkey and afterwards, we designated her US citizenship status ‘Classified and Top Secret’ on the grounds of Sensitive Diplomatic Relations. To this date, despite all attempts, Turkish authorities have been unable to have these files opened.

3. Ms. Ciller and her husband Ozer Ciller were closely involved with certain CIA operations prior to and after her return to Turkey, and their intimate relationship continued throughout her tenure as Prime Minister of the Republic of Turkey. In fact, the CIA’s Roger Tamraz (see BCCI) was their partner in two front companies: ‘Emperyal’, which acquired and operated six (6) Casinos in Turkmenistan, and, ‘Lapis,’ involved with the oil pipeline project.

4. Ms. Ciller and her husband, before being considered ‘viable’ by us, already had an established shady financial past, including involvement in an embezzlement scandal connected to the collapse of ‘Istanbul Bankasi’, one of Turkey’s largest private banks. This along with involvements fortified Ms. Ciller’s qualification criteria when compared to competing applicants.

5. Ms. Ciller understood and participated in Turkey’s important strategic and operational role in the supply and transportation of heroin. She skillfully and very aggressively combined and furthered the marriage between the state military-police-intelligence and the underground heroin industry. Her notoriety even reached the German Courts, where she was accused of supporting and protecting the drug mafia - active not only in Turkey but elsewhere, including Europe and Central Asia.

6. Ms. Ciller played a direct role in scandals involving corruption, embezzlement, and state sponsored terrorism and narcotics operations. The best known scandal, one of her masterpieces, is known as ‘Susurluk’. Ciller and her husband - who is known for his mafia links and dealings, were directly implicated in Susurluk. The high profile kept by Ms. And Mr. Ciller during these scandals and their handling of them afterwards significantly bolstered their ‘value’ and ‘viability’ for us.

7. Ms. Ciller’s ‘known’ wealth is confirmed to be over $50 million, all of which was gained after she became a ‘’viable’ candidate supported directly by the US. A large portion of her investments and accounts are in the United States. We will not list the exact amount at this point, however, the selected candidate will be given an opportunity to see the ‘real’ dollar amount, and even consult with Ms. Ciller directly.

We can list many other desirable qualities of former Prime Minister Ciller, however for this appendix the above points should suffice. Interested candidates can conduct their own research and compare their qualifications to Ms. Ciller to get a better understanding of our ‘viability’ criteria for those candidates we select, support, promote, install, and sustain in ‘that’ part of the world. As you can see, we helped Ms. Ciller weather all accusations, investigations, and official charges, whether in Turkey or internationally. We made sure she and her government continuously received our military aid, development funds, and of course IMF funds. How she chose to spend, divert, or ‘lose’ these funds were left completely up to her, with no questions asked. Today she enjoys her incredible, almost fairytale like lifestyle, made possible with the enormous wealth accumulated through her official position, gained and sustained by our backing. We are pleased to take full credit for this. We will guarantee similar benefits for our candidate of choice in Iran.

So dear reader, if you're one of the millions out of work with no future prospects in view, you too can apply to become the "candidate of choice for Iran". The benefits package alone will enable you to view the Wall Street vermin as indistinguishable from the unwashed masses.

Monday, June 22, 2009


"Someone had convinced AKP that with such hawkish strategies it could finish DTP and weaken PKK. AKP thinks that the more it becomes hawkish, the more powerful it would become in the Southeast."
~ Mithat Sancar, Ankara University.

Henri Barkey, American professor of international relations and long-time defender of the status quo, thinks that the US should mediate a peaceful solution to the Kurdish situation in Turkey between the Ankara regime and the PKK. From the WSJ:

Turkish Kurds and the PKK too are signaling that they are ready for a compromise. The current PKK leader, for instance, in a long set of interviews with a renowned Turkish journalist said that the PKK was ready to abandon the armed struggle in exchange for a process that begins with a cessation of hostilities and discussions between Ankara and Turkish Kurdish political representatives. However, the situation is so complex that Turks and Kurds will need outside help to complete a deal. There are too many extremists on both sides who would love to scuttle this new opening. A U.S. role could be decisive.

In this paragraph, Barkey refers to the series by Milliyet's Hasan Cemal, links to which can be found in this post. The problem is that the situation is not "so complex", as Barkey characterizes it; it is really very simple and, since 2006, Murat Karayılan and the Executive Council of the KCK have clearly outlined what steps should be taken in order to begin a political settlement.

Not that I would expect a privileged member of the "civilized" world to think that Kurds and Turks could solve their own problems without the help of the same kind of privileged members of the "civilized" world. As Murat Karayılan stated in his interview with Hasan Cemal, in order to silence weapons, will is needed. We all know who is lacking will and it's not the Kurdish side.

Barkey continues:

Washington is in a strong position to help because of its positive relationships with both Turkey and the Kurds. The U.S. has demonstrated its bona fides with Ankara by extending much-needed logistical support to Turkish counterinsurgency operations, and consistently backing Turkey in international forums on the PKK issue. At the same time, the U.S. is held in high regard by Kurds everywhere for its role in their liberation from Saddam Hussein's rule in Iraq.

Washington does not have a "positive relationship" with the Kurds of Turkey therefore the US is not "held in high regard by Kurds everywhere".

It's very difficult to have a positive relationship with a people that you have helped to genocide at least since 1980. It's impossible to have a positive relationship with a people when you've sided with their genociders and have sold billions of dollars worth of the very weapons that the genociders have used to murder the same people and destroy their villages and livelihoods. It's impossible to have a positive relationship when you have characterized the defenders of the Kurdish people as "terrorists" so that you can continue to benefit from your very own bullshit Global War on Terror, Inc.

The US may be held in high regard by the Kurds of Iraq for reasons that serve their interests, but it is not held in high regard by the Kurds of Turkey.

Barkey continues:

Thus, the U.S. can help demobilize the PKK by acting as a trusted go-between. The PKK is unlikely to give up its arms to the Turkish military, but it might to American forces which, in turn, could offer iron-clad verification that both the Turkish government and public would trust. U.S. diplomats can ensure that a few PKK leaders find refuge far from the region, and reassure Ankara that the pro-American KRG will prevent anti-Turkish insurgents who stay in Iraq from engaging in any future mischief. This way many PKK insurgents can also return home to their families and Turks can begin to discuss domestic political reforms to expand the Kurds' cultural rights without the specter of violence hanging over. Finally, the U.S. can propose the establishment of a Qualified Industrial Zone (like that of Israel and its neighbors) that would include Kurdish-inhabited southeastern Turkey and northern Iraq, to promote economic activity and strengthen the ties between Turkey and the KRG. Landlocked KRG relies on Turkey for its economic linkages with the rest of the world and oil from Kurdish-controlled fields has recently begun flowing into Turkey.

It's impossible for the US to act as a "trusted go-between" for the reasons outlined above. Let me add that it is impossible to consider the US a "trusted go-between" because, in the aftermath of DTP's success in the 29 March local elections, the US did not condemn Turkey for its violence against the DTP. Obama made his first visit to Turkey immediately after the elections, and he mentioned nothing about the corrupt election practices that the AKP used against DTP, particularly in Ağrı. Nor was there any US protest against the violence the AKP unleashed against the Kurdish people after Obama left Turkey. There was no outrage by the US when the AKP launched a terror operation against the pro-Kurdish DTP, arresting hundreds of its politicians and political workers.

But, Turkey isn't Iran, is it?

Barkey assumes that HPG is going to lay down its weapons and disarm itself. This has never been discussed by either KCK or DTP and is not in the works to be discussed. If Barkey actually read Hasan Cemal's series, he would know this and perhaps not be so misleading in his WSJ piece.

Barkey assumes that the KCK leadership wants "refuge far from the region". This idea has never crossed the lips of any leader of the KCK. It's never crossed the lips of any leader of HPG, ever.

Barkey assumes that the economic situation is the only situation that is problematic for Kurds in Turkey. If he had followed the campaign leading up to the 29 March elections, he would have known that the AKP's attempts to bribe the Kurdish people with material goods did not yield the results AKP was hoping for; the problem in The Southeast is not essentially an economic one.

As for Ankara's relationship with the KRG, this is an American problem and not one for Kurds of Turkey, especially as the relationship from an American perspective appears to be concerned with the flow of oil out of Iraq, as noted in the piece. It's also been an American obsession that the Ankara regime and the KRG get along when the fact is that both have been getting along quite well together as they have since the 1990s when they fought together against the Kurds of Turkey.

The US as mediator in solving the Kurdish situation in Turkey is absolutely, positively unacceptable. The US has no credibility whatsoever and that lack of credibility is amplified exponentially when it comes to the Kurdish situation.

After all, it was only three years ago that we had a small taste of what US mediation would be like when Joseph Ralston was appointed as "special envoy" to "coordinate the PKK for Turkey". We know very well that the US is only interested in mediating as far as its own interests go and not a step further. The US would, in fact, be a deceptive, untrustworthy mediator.

It's difficult to imagine that there is any country on earth that would be sufficient to negotiate between the Ankara regime and the PKK because, as we have seen with recent threats against former Danish PM Rasmussen's appointment to head NATO. Although Denmark has stood firm for the right of Kurdish freedom of speech in that case of Roj TV and thus far, it is the exception rather than the rule. There is no country that would stand firm against all of Turkey's threats or bribes and corruption so that it could be trusted to broker an honest deal between the Ankara regime and the PKK.

Murat Karayılan must think so, too, and that's why he's repreatedly expressed a desire for a group of "intellectuals" to act as mediators with the Ankara regime. It would only be just that most of the "intellectuals" involved in such a plan should be drawn from among those who will have to live with the results of their efforts. In other words, most of them will have to come from Turkey itself.

Of course, that would remove Henri Barkey from any possibility of participating in the effort since the last person needed to help solve the Kurdish situation in Turkey is an "intellectual" who penned a book about the Kurds of Turkey with the CIA's Graham Fuller.

Oh, coincidentally, Graham Fuller not only supported Fethullah Gülen in his petition for a green card, but he also made the list of Sibel Edmonds' State Secrets Privilege Gallery.

Thursday, June 18, 2009


"Let's not miss the peace opportunity this time."
~ Murat Karayılan.

Something from the email inbox:


Lift the ban on the PKK – Justice and Freedom for the Kurds

To the UK government and the European Union

For the past 30 years, the Kurdish region of South-Eastern Turkey has been wracked by conflict between the Turkish state and the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). A peaceful settlement could be achieved – but efforts to secure peace have been jeopardised by the UK and European Union’s ban on the PKK as a ‘terrorist’ organization. As a result, the only organization that enjoys the mass support of Kurdish people has effectively been excluded from the negotiating table.

The Kurdish people seek peace. The Turkish government says it wants peace. The European Union wants a stable and democratic Turkey to become a member of the EU. But no armed conflict as deeply rooted as the one between Turkey and the Kurds has ever been resolved without first reaching a political settlement that is formally binding and verifiable. Of necessity this demands a willingness by all parties – in this instance, representatives of the Turkish state and of the PKK - to negotiate on equal terms. The ban on the PKK has placed a block on such dialogue even starting.

We believe that PKK has clearly demonstrated over many years that it commands the loyalties of the vast proportion of the Kurdish people living in Turkey and the Kurdish diaspora. We also believe that the organisation has successfully given voice to the Kurdish people’s demands and has articulated these demands in responsible and measured ways. In so doing, it has shown that it is fully entitled to be regarded as the representative body of the Kurdish people. Indeed, no peace agreement is likely to be reached without the PKK’s active participation. Lifting the ban is a thus a pre-requisite to peace.

We are also concerned that the continuing conflict between Turkey and its Kurdish minority remains a serious obstacle to lasting peace and democratic reform in Turkey and inhibits progress on its accession to the European Union

Despite being held in prison by Turkey for more than ten years, Abdullah Ocalan, the PKK’s founder and leader, still commands the loyalty and support of millions of Kurdish people. During his decade of detention and indeed long before Ocalan has issued many constructive proposals for peace and dialogue and the PKK has adopted numerous unilateral ceasefires.

We believe that both Ocalan and the PKK have an important role to play in the pursuit of a lasting peace between Turkey and the Kurds. We the undersigned are convinced that by delisting the PKK the deeply longed for peace will be brought that much closer.

Supported by Kurdish Federation UK, Kurdish People’s Council, Peace in Kurdistan Campaign

First signatories to PKK appeal Mark Thomas, journalist/comedian; Tim Gopsill, Editor, National Union of Journalists; Margaret Owen, Widows for Peace through Democracy (WPD); Gareth Peirce, human rights lawyer; Hugo Charlton, barrister; Roger Tompkins, international human rights lawyer, retired; Michael Gunter, Professor of Political Science, Tennessee Technological University, US; Dr Felix Padel, writer, UK; Caroline Austin, photographer, NUJ; Tony Gard, Movement for Justice; Hywel Williams MP; Martin Caton MP; Bill Etherington MP; Ronnie Campbell MP ; Nick Harvey MP; David Drew MP; Les Levidow, CAMPACC; Saleh Mamon, CAMPACC; Ann Alexander, Scotland Against Criminalising Communities; Richard Haley, Scotland Against Criminalising Communities; Norman Horne, retired; Prof. Dr. Raimund Rütten, Universität Frankfurt am Main; Sarah Parker, translator, Socialist Resistance, London; Dave Hewitt, Nottingham; Carmencita Karagdag, Coordinator, Peace for Life (; Patrick Mac Manus, Foreningen Oprør / Rebellion (Denmark):; Navn Karl Aage Angri Jacobsen, Red-Green Alliance (Denmark)/Retired; Raymond Swing Frederiksberg, Denmark; Janni Milsted , Pædagog, Denmark; Ove John Nielsen, Denmark; Ion Meyer, Kopenhagen University, Denmark; Ulrik Danneskiold-Samsøe, Denmark; Gitte Thomsen, Denmark; Jette Englund, Denville, New Jersey USA; Ricardo Gustavo Espeja, historian, Argentina; Xusrew Zeki , IT Consultant

3,275 have signed the appeal by 1 June 2009 – PLEASE SUPPORT AND ADD YOUR NAME!

Deadline for signatures 15 July 2009!

Kurdish Federation UK
Peace in Kurdistan Campaign
c/o 44 Ainger Road, London NW3 3AT

You do not have to be a citizen of the UK to sign this petition so please copy and paste it into your email, add your signature and return it to or

If you're in the UK, you may send it by post to Peace in Kurdistan Campaign, c/o 44 Ainger Road, London NW3 3AT.

Patrons of the campaign include: Lord Avebury, John Austin MP, Lord Rea, Lord Dholakia, Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP, John Bowis MEP, Jean Lambert MEP, Alyn Smith MEP, Hywel Williams MP, Elfyn Llwyd MP, Julie Christie, Noam Chomsky, Edward Albee, Mark Thomas.


Wednesday, June 17, 2009


"It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything."
~ Joseph Stalin.

There is a statement from PJAK on the recent Iranian elections at KurdishMedia, but the English version is not available at PJAK's website. However, here's a piece:

A none-democratic [sic] and threatening response entailing the acts of violence would not produce a positive and auspicious result for the regime or for its leadership. The mass’s protests have been escalated in scope and degree and there is no doubt it will continue in the future. The public protests have been triggered in different cities of Kurdistan and in the following days we will witness the mass movement.

Once again we declare that the Kurdish nation would not accept none-democratic [sic] or degrading treatments. The Iranian regime must stop these approaches in both Kurdistan and Iran. As a democratic party, we declare that the Kurdish nation and all other Iranian nations have the rights to participate in these civil disobedience and peaceful protests. These rights have been laid out within the framework of the international laws and charter and not a single person or an oligarchic group can deny them.

Meanwhile, the KNCNA had called for a Kurdish boycott of the Iranian elections. Note the following:

Aside from the issue of selected nominees, no party in Iran, “reformists” or “non-reformists,” have ever addressed the dire life and death concerns of the Kurdish people in Iran. The provinces where Kurds reside in Iran have been under “emergency rule” for the past 30 years, which means a martial law and the presence of heavy military personnel. The fiscal allocations to these regions have always been severely under prioritized; in such a way that currently some of the most poverty stricken areas of Iran are places where Kurds reside. Unimaginable poverty, unemployment, homelessness, illiteracy, health-care issues, environmental concerns, including lack of clean and available water, under-developed infrastructure, security concerns, trafficking of drugs and many other concerns plague the region, and yet none of the selected candidates, “reformists” or “non-reformists,” have made attempts at addressing these issues.

Kurds make up the highest number of political prisoners of conscience, are arbitrarily detained, and are executed at an alarming rate in Iran, which again, neither one of the selected nominees think should be revised or reformed.

The issue of human rights, political prisoners of conscience, freedom of expression, freedom of press, freedom of religious practice and assembly, the execution of minors, the crackdown of decent or organized civil rights movements and unionization, is beyond a Kurdish human rights crisis, it is an International crisis that crosses all borders and political partisanship.

This, of course, is why we have PJAK. But you don't hear about any of this in the bullshit American media, do you?

There would be no point in Iranian Kurds voting anyway, since the Teheran regime continues to repress Kurds, as documented by Human Rights Watch as late as January, 2009, a report that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Teheran regime has not improved its human rights record since 2005.

In July of 2005, in Mahabad, Iranian security forces murdered Sivan Qaderi in public--a fact which was also documented by HRW--and which set off protests in East Kurdistan that lasted through August of that year:

On July 9, security forces shot and killed Shivan Qaderi in Mahabad. Kurdish groups, quoting Qaderi's brother, said that Qaderi was approached by the security forces in public, shot three times, and then tied to a military vehicle and dragged around the city. According to these reports, Qaderi was a social and political activist, but government authorities have accused him of “moral and financial violations.”

In the wake of Qaderi's murder, protests erupted in several cities and towns in Kurdistan. Protestors demanded that the government apprehend Qaderi's killers and put them on trial. Some of the protests reportedly involved attacks on government buildings and offices. Human Rights Watch obtained a list of 17 protestors killed by the security forces, including three people shot dead in Oshnavieh on July 26, two people shot dead in Baneh on July 30, one person shot dead in Sardasht on August 2, and 11 people shot dead in Saqqez on August 3.

Photos of Qaderi's body can be viewed here. Having taken office in August 2005, this was Ahmadinejad's first response to the Kurdish people as president. Nothing has changed.

For an informal discussion of the Iranian elections as covered by the bullshit American media, check Sibel Edmonds' Tuesday post and for a comparison of the treatment of other elections by the bullshit American media, including events in Ağrı after Turkey's 29 March elections, see her Wednesday post.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009


"Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd."
~ Bertrand Russell.

More good news from the US military. Along with Christian jihadis taking over the officer corps, the neo-Nazis seem to be growing in numbers in the US military, too. From Salon:

Today a complete ban on membership in racist organizations appears to have been lifted — though the proliferation of white supremacists in the military is difficult to gauge. The military does not track them as a discrete category, coupling them with gang members. But one indication of the scope comes from the FBI.

Following an investigation of white supremacist groups, a 2008 FBI report declared: "Military experience — ranging from failure at basic training to success in special operations forces — is found throughout the white supremacist extremist movement." In white supremacist incidents from 2001 to 2008, the FBI identified 203 veterans. Most of them were associated with the National Alliance and the National Socialist Movement, which promote anti-Semitism and the overthrow of the U.S. government, and assorted skinhead groups.

Because the FBI focused only on reported cases, its numbers don't include the many extremist soldiers who have managed to stay off the radar. But its report does pinpoint why the white supremacist movements seek to recruit veterans — they "may exploit their accesses to restricted areas and intelligence or apply specialized training in weapons, tactics, and organizational skills to benefit the extremist movement."

In fact, since the movement's inception, its leaders have encouraged members to enlist in the U.S. military as a way to receive state-of-the-art combat training, courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer, in preparation for a domestic race war. The concept of a race war is central to extremist groups, whose adherents imagine an eruption of violence that pits races against each other and the government.

And it goes all the way up the chain of command:

"Racism was rampant," recalls vet Michael Prysner, who served in Iraq in 2003 and 2004 as part of the 173rd Airborne Brigade. "All of command, everywhere, it was completely ingrained in the consciousness of every soldier. I've heard top generals refer to the Iraq people as 'hajjis.' The anti-Arab racism came from the brass. It came from the top. And everything was justified because they weren't considered people."

[ . . . ]

Geoffrey Millard, an organizer for Iraq Veterans Against the War, served in Iraq for 13 months, beginning in 2004, as part of the 42nd Infantry Division. He recalls Gen. George Casey, who served as the commander in Iraq from 2004 to 2007, addressing a briefing he attended in the summer of 2005 at Forward Operating Base, outside Tikrit. "As he walked past, he was talking about some incident that had just happened, and he was talking about how 'these stupid fucking hajjis couldn't figure shit out.' And I'm just like, Are you kidding me? This is Gen. Casey, the highest-ranking guy in Iraq, referring to the Iraqi people as 'fucking hajjis.'" (A spokesperson for Casey, now the Army Chief of Staff, said the general "did not make this statement.")

"The military is attractive to white supremacists," Millard says, "because the war itself is racist."

Surprise, surprise, surprise! Congress is going to sweep it all under the rug:

The U.S. Senate Committee on the Armed Forces has long been considered one of Congress' most powerful groups. It governs legislation affecting the Pentagon, defense budget, military strategies and operations. Today it is led by the influential Sens. Carl Levin and John McCain. An investigation by the committee into how white supremacists permeate the military in plain violation of U.S. law could result in substantive changes. I contacted the committee but staffers would not agree to be interviewed. Instead, a spokesperson responded that white supremacy in the military has never arisen as a concern. In an e-mail, the spokesperson said, "The Committee doesn't have any information that would indicate this is a particular problem."

Now you know why the Pentagon is so anxious to repress the publication of torture photos and it should be nothing to wonder about that the Pentagon is now thinking about backtracking on its promise to release a report on an air attack in Afghanistan that killed 140 civilians.

Monday, June 15, 2009


"International law calls this organization's actions "terror" if it conducts an armed struggle when it has an alternative way of struggle through the open door of politics and law."
~ Ahmet Altan, Taraf.

Ahmet Altan explains why PKK is not a "terrorist organization", from Taraf:

You Cannot Solve It by Saying It's Terror

I don't know how our generals came to the point that they believe they know the best of everything.

I guess they are getting educated like that in military schools.

They have ideas for every subject and they want their ideas to be implemented.

If the thing they wanted does not come about, they show their weapons.

For instance, they say, "A president whose wife wears a scarf cannot sit in Çankaya."

For this they write memoranda.

Then, in elections when people say, "Sure it can, why shouldn't it," they get surprised.

In addition to having ideas about the scarf issue, they have uncriticizable ideas about the Kurdish question, too.

While talking about the Kurdish question, the general staff talks about, "hitting the 'terrorist' organization."

Is this a solution?

The army is hitting against PKK for twenty-five years.

What is the result?

Thousands of dead, hundreds of millions of dollars spent.

And the Kurdish question remains unsolved in front of society.

PKK continues its existence in the mountains.

I guess before everything, we have to decide what PKK is.

Is PKK a terrorist organization?

The thing that you say as a terrorist organization has ten members, fifty members, one hundred members at the most.

However, PKK is an organization that has thousands of militants, fighting with an army for twenty-five years, can establish an electric power plant, builds a dam, has an organization that is spread throughout the world, has a large financial source, and has the support of an important number of people.

This cannot be called a "terrorist organization."

International law calls this organization's actions "terror" if it conducts an armed struggle when it has an alternative way of struggle through the open door of politics and law.

However this doesn't make PKK a "terrorist organization" but makes it an organization that conducts "terror".

If you think the reverse, I think it will be better understood.

There have been seventeen thousand extra-judicial murders in The Southeast.

Slowly it is revealed that most of these murders have been committed by JİTEM, which is under the authority of the army.

The informers tell everything; at the addresses where the secret witnesses point, bodies come out.

Collecting seventeen thousand people from the street and killing them is certainly terrorism.

Does this conduct make the army a "terrorist organization"?


It makes it an organization that implements terror in The Southeast.

If we cannot understand what PKK is, we cannot comprehend the reason for its existence, and how it survived despite twenty-five years of war, and thousands of its casualties.

PKK is an organization that has its roots in people.

The Turkish view of PKK and the Kurdish view of PKK is very different.

PKK, for some Kurds, is a "holy" organization.

Among Kurds, it has several opponents, people who are angry with it, people who criticize it, but in general all the Kurds think the "Kurdish question" was brought to the country's attention by PKK.

Without understanding these, planning a strategy of "war" or "peace" is convicting yourself to failure.

I know that seeing the realities in this country discomforts some people, but it is impossible to solve the problems without seeing the truth.

Both Turkish and Kurdish politicians, the army, and PKK, too, must get out from the "cyber-world" which was created by a war that lasted for twenty-five years and confront the realities.

If the state's goal is the annihilation of PKK, this is a wrong goal.

Firstly, it is impossible to annihilate PKK with arms.

Secondly, even if you annihilate PKK, you will not be able to solve the problem. A new organization will show up in its place.

The problem is the usurpation of the rights of fifteen million people.

As long as the Turks hold the power of "granting rights" to the Kurds, this problem will continue.

We have to form a state in which no one has a right to "grant a right" to another and we have to form a state in which the rights of all people are guaranteed through a social contract.

The chief of the general staff says, "Cultural rights can be given, but on an individual basis."

He says Kurds cannot do politics.

He cannot say this.

In a normal country society will tell such a general, "It's none of your business."

These are the decisions that civilian politicians will decide.

Whether cultural or political rights will be given, who is going to talk with whom, are not the jobs of the military.

If the soldiers are going to do politics, who is going to do the military's job?

We have to take the military out of these issues.

Then we have to sit and evaluate the situation realistically.

The Kurdish question is not a question that can be solved by reducing it to a "terrorist" question by calling PKK a "terrorist organization", and passing the issue of "who will give rights to whom" to the military.

The Kurds and the Turks are going to sit and talk.

They will seek ways where everybody can feel themselves as "first-class" citizens, secured, comfortable, and happy.

Furthermore this is not an option anymore for the two sides. This is a "must"; because life commands it with its fearsome power.

For more on PKK's position on this subject, see:

Notes from Kandil, 1

Notes from Kandil 2: This Isn't Your Dad's PKK

Notes from Kandil 3: Where There's a Will . . .

Notes from Kandil 4: Possibilities

Karayılan in The Times

Wednesday, June 10, 2009


"A people who's primary aims are driving, shopping, and television are subject to terrorism at any time."
~ Steven Deitz.

Okay, I have a question for you, but first let me set up the scenario.

A white supremacist opens fire with a .22 caliber rifle at the US Holocaust Museum in Washington DC. Is that terrorism, given that terrorims is defined by the US Code as:

(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;

Here's another scenario: A Christian jihadi kills an abortion doctor. The jihadi had connections to a white supremacist group and has threatened more attacks. Is that terrorism?

It sure looks like terrorism to me, if we go by the definition outlined by the US Code.

In April the Department of Homeland Security issued an report on the resurgence in rightwing extremism. "Extremism" here is a euphemism for "terrorism". And the FBI knew all about this Roeder guy hanging out around Dr. Tiller's clinic, yet they did nothing. All of this makes me wonder exactly who might be behind this sudden rise in the acting out of extreme right-wing fascists in the US, since the government obviously already knows that the fascists are going to act out. Why isn't it doing anything about its own terrorism?

Because, hell, it sure looks like terrorism to me.

And when is the US government going to send these guys to Guantanamo? Is it going to apply "enhanced interrogation techniques" on Roeder in order to find out where and when the next attacks will occur and by whom? Is it going to waterboard him? Why doesn't it waterboard von Brunn, the shooter at the Holocaust Museum, in order to find out who else in his social circle might be planning more terrorist attacks?

And if it doesn't do these things, why not?

Or, is "enhanced interrogation" just for brown people and other foreigners?

UPDATE: Liz Cheney, daughter of pro-torture Dick Cheney, thinks we should be careful with our words:

I do think people need to be a little bit careful about using words like terrorism before we know exactly -- you know, clearly, he [von Brunn] was psychotic. But we don't really know much yet about whether or not he was representing any sort of an organization. I think we need to be a little bit careful.

Not only does she think we should be careful about whom we call terrorists, but she's also trying to lay the groundwork for an insanity defense for the terrorist von Brunn.


Monday, June 08, 2009


"Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error."
~ Cicero.

Oh, oh, oh . . . What Aysel Tuğluk said:

Answering questions from the audience, Tuğluk said, "People have to realise that the 2.5 million votes received by the DTP are by people who sympathise with the PKK. The PKK is not just 5-7,000 people in the Kandil mountains."

You go, girlfriend, you go! I don't think it could be any clearer than that.

Comrade Aysel also spoke about the three possibilities for a solution to the Kurdish situation in The Southeast:

She said that there were three possible paths to take towards a solution of the Kurdish question. The first, leading to a "quick solution", would be for state representatives to speak with imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan. She said that Öcalan was influential both "in the organisation and with the people."

The second path would be for the state to define the problem without contacting anyone, but asking international actors to act as mediators. She argued that this was the path being followed at the moment. She warned however, that this process would fail if "the DTP, the PKK and Öcalan are not considered as partners" in the dialogue.

The third path, and the one advised by Tuğluk, was to build a dialogue with the DTP, which would mean an indirect dialogue with the PKK and Öcalan.

She reiterated the suggestion of current PKK leader Murat Karayılan, who had called for intellectuals to be integrated in the process, arguing that this would stop the process from stalling.

I'm glad she spelled it all out. I don't think there's any need to look for any explanation of what she said or to have it interpreted by someone because it's crystal clear just the way she said it and it's the same thing that's been said for years, anyway.

Of course it's all theoretical at the moment because no concrete steps have been taken by the Ankara regime, which just goes to show that the country is run by a pack of greedy idiots.

Think about how the Middle East would change if Turkey would finally come to its senses and come to a genuine political solution for Kurds. It would dominate the region. Let's imagine that it didn't come up with some half-assed Kurdology department in the universities but implemented mother language education starting from the very first day of a Kurdish child's education that also included Turkish language as a mandatory subject. Those kids would be ready for classes taught exclusively in Turkish language by the time they hit high school, maybe before. Not only would they become fluent in Turkish, they'd be fluent in Kurdish and they would have absorbed the basic knowledge of all other subjects because the foundations of those subjects would have been taught in their mother language.

If such a thing were to happen, Turkey would actually play an important role in the standardization of Kurmanci.

If Turkey were to do these things on top of solving it's most pressing problem, it could feasibly become a magnet for the higher education of Kurds throughout the region and, thus, spread it's influence within the societies of the neighboring countries, and abroad, in a positive way.

But, no, this is just imagination, remember? The reality is that, under the AKP, Turkey remains no better than any other lame-ass, tin-pot totalitarian state. Turkey is the finest example of a group of people who have cut off their noses to spite their faces and the AKP is nothing more than a club for the criminally idiotic.

Wednesday, June 03, 2009


"It is only in folk tales, children's stories, and the journals of intellectual opinion that power is used wisely and well to destroy evil. The real world teaches very different lessons, and it takes willful and dedicated ignorance to fail to perceive them."
~ Noam Chomsky.

I used to think IWPR was a fairly decent source of news, especially from such places as Iraq or Afghanistan, but I think I'll have to reasses my judgement.

IWPR has a piece up about the PKK and the KRG, in which it claims that the KRG is supposed to "end the fighting between it's neighbors and Kurdish rebels based inside its borders."

How is the KRG supposed to do that when those who need to sit downn to "end the fighting" are the Ankara regime and the Kurds of North Kurdistan, including the PKK?

Henri Barkey, author of a recent report on the region for a Washington-based think-tank the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told IWPR the KRG could seek to persuade the rebels to agree to some form of deal “and ensure that a demilitarisation is done honourably”.

Now we have just seen where the PKK itself stands with regard to a political solution with the Ankara regime, in Hasan Cemal's series from Kandil (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4), all of which were available from the original source at Milliyet days before the IWPR piece was published. Later we had the piece from the London Times which included statements from Murat Karayılan that were the same as in the Hasan Cemal series.

So why didn't IWPR or Henri Barkey call attention to the position of the PKK as regards a cessation of hostilities? Why did they ignore PKK's position on the matter altogether?

And the same can be said of the jackass who passes for the "US embassy official in Ankara" who spoke to the author of the IWPR piece. Are we to believe that the diplomatic jackass had absolutely no clue about Hasan Cemal's series? I find that impossible to believe. The Americans know very well but have their own reasons for keeping the fighting going and those reasons are $$$$$.

The jackass continues:

Unlike the KRG, the United States endorses military action as part of a broader solution to the conflict. A US embassy official in Ankara told IWPR Washington’s strategy to end the fighting included supporting Turkey “with intelligence sharing and other operations”.

The Washington regime supports a losing strategy because its military-industrial complex benefits from it by the billions and, for this reason alone, the US has no reason to see an end to the fighting.

The US stepped up its engagement in the region in 2007 by classifying the PKK as a terrorist organisation – a move which effectively bars the group from any potential US-backed peace talks.

That's plain bullshit. If the US wanted peace talks, the US would overlook its bogus "List" and start to force the issue of negotiations.

“The PKK has conducted more than enough violent acts to justify being labelled a terrorist organisation,” said the US official, when asked whether the move to proscribe the group may have weakened prospects for an eventual settlement by affirming Turkey’s military strategy.

We should acquiesce to this statement, shouldn't we, since it's uttered by a member of the world's biggest terrorist organization--the Washington regime--whose violent acts make even the Ankara regime's violent acts pale in comparison. Of course, if it had been Americans in the position of Kurds in Turkey there would have been no uprising against repression because Americans are sheep. On the other hand, if they had engaged in uprising, they, too, would be terrorists.

To rise up against severe repression and gross human rights abuses is not terrorism. It's a natural reaction.

More from the jackass:

The US official stressed that military operations alone would not solve the conflict. She said leaders in the region were working towards “a comprehensive solution that includes other aspects of the Kurdish issue”, such as economic and social development.

"Military operations alone would not solve the conflict," but that's the only option either the Washington or the Ankara regime considers. Again: $$$$$$. Let's also note that it was immediately after Obama's visit to Turkey that the Ankara regime engaged in terror operations against the DTP, arresting its members in the same way that it arrested members of every other pro-Kurdish political party in Turkey's atrocious history. Doesn't that make it look very much like the Americans gave the green light for the terror operations?

And I'd like to know which "leaders in the region" are working to solve the Kurdish issue? Does this mean the Turkish security forces who rounded up the DTP politicians and workers? Does this mean the AKP who went all over The Southeast in the days before the 29 March electcion, handing out washing machines, refrigerators and cash?

But Barkey says the US “has not been as energetic as it could have been” in pursuing a resolution of the conflict.

Oh but the US has been very energetic in pursuing a military resolution, particularly when it appointed Lockheed Martin board of directors' member Joseph Ralston as its "special envoy" to coordinate the PKK for Turkey. Again: $$$$$

However, the KRG has kept its forces out of the conflicts, claiming it does not have the means or the grounds to retaliate.

“The KRG can’t attack or oust PJAK and PKK because [Iran and Turkey’s] problem is not with the KRG,” said Jabbar Yawar, a top official in charge of Kurdish forces.

This isn't quite the truth, is it? The fact of the matter is that the pesmerge know they got their asses kicked by PKK when they teamed up with TSK in the 1990s to annihilate the guerrillas and they don't want to do that again. At the time, Turkey itself tucked its tail between its legs and ran back across the border dragging its body bags behind it.

Yawar said Kurdish troops can defend the borders “if there are any ground assaults, but not against bombardments and aerial strikes”.

Well, that's not quite true either. It was PKK who defended the border during TSK's February 2007 land invasion and not the peşmêrge.

The KRG has long ruled out military action against the rebels, as demanded by Turkey and Iran. It has also avoided retaliating against its neighbours, as demanded by the Kurdish street.

The KRG rules out military action because the peşmêrge remembered what happened to them the last time they went to get a piece of PKK. If the Americans are so gung-ho to settle this situation for Ankara, let them go to the mountains and give it a try! A word of warning, however: You have to leave your Bradley's behind. Whatever you need, you'll have to carry on your back. Good luck and thank you for giving your lives for Atatürk's descendents.

There's also mention of the "Kurdish" conference in this piece:

In March, Iraq’s president and the leader of one of its two major Kurdish parties, Jalal Talabani, announced plans for an international peace conference drawing together the region’s Kurdish political groups.

The conference could have seen the triumphant climax of the KRG’s careful diplomacy if, as many had hoped, it yielded a declaration demanding the PKK and PJAK disarm.

But the meeting, due to have been hosted in Iraqi Kurdistan, was postponed. The reasons behind the cancellation are unclear. However, the delay has highlighted the problems the KRG faces as it seeks to promote peace beyond its borders.

TSK's been demanding PKK's disarmament for decades; the KRG will have the same luck as TSK in doing the same. However, the reasons behind the cancellation of the "Kurdish" conference are crystal clear: DTP won massively over AKP on 29 March and that means that the "Kurdish" conference, demanded by AKP and the Americans, would not be the proper vehicle for a joint Turkish-American demand for disarmament if DTP were sitting at the same table wearing their victory laurels.

No, there is nothing at all mysterious about the indefinite postponement of the "Kurdish" conference. Nor is there anything mysterious about this piece in IWPR; it's propaganda for the status quo.

To read more on how the media promotes the status quo, take a look at an analysis by Sibel Edmonds on how Newsweek deliberately screwed up reporting her case, in order to make her look less credible than she actually is. You'll find it at the first in her series on Project Expose MSM.

Tuesday, June 02, 2009


"We will be forced to continue a war of defence. Such a war would be different from the period before 1 June."
~ Nurettin Sofi, HPG Headquarters Commander.

The ATC conference is ongoing in Washington through tomorrow and İlker Başbuğ is in attendanceç On Monday night, Başbuğ revealed Turkey's intentions with regard to the Kurdish question:

"Therefore, we are very much determined to fight against the terrorist organization until its total elimination. This fight is a long-term effort, and it requires patience," he said.

Başbuğ has been meeting with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen and we can assume that they are working out the details of Turkey coming to US aid in Afghanistan/Pakistan. Any deal on this issue will require a counter-deal from the US and that counter-deal will focus on PKK, especially since the Ankara-Washington "Kurdish" conference has been indefinitely nixed, thanks to DTP's success in the 29 March elections. Bet on some new fly in the ointment for the future, in spite of the recent publicity that Hasan Cemal's series from Kandil generated.

I mean, if that got your hopes up, you're a real tenderfoot anyway. There is only one way to solve Turkey's most serious problem.

And so much for Gül's less than impressive remarks that the Kurdish situation is Turkey's most serious problem. Such is an obvious statement of fact, the acknowledgement of which does not mean that there will be any steps of goodwill from the Ankara regime. In August 2005, Katil Erdoğan went to Amed [Diyarbakır] and promised to deal with the Kurdish situation by applying more democracy. The opposite happened: after the Amed Serhildan seven months later, repression and murder became, once again, the order of the day.

Following that example, we should expect more repression from the regime as an answer to the Kurdish situation and we have seen the beginning of that in the recent arrests of DTP members.

Meanwhile, HPG Headquarters Commander Nurettin Sofi countered Başbuğ's statement:

HPG commander Nurettin Sofi announced that "if the attitude of the government and the army does not change, there will be an intensification."

Speaking to the Fırat News Agency (ANF), Sofi said, "We will be forced to continue a war of defence. Such a war would be different from the period before 1 June."

He threatened a spread of fighting throughout Turkey.

Mark the last two sentences there and pay attention! Like I said above, there is only one way to solve Turkey's most serious problem.

Sofi points out that which I have pointed out here in the last few weeks, that TSK operations against HPG continue in The Southeast. On top of that, we all know what Başbuğ means when he says that Turkey will fight PKK to the end:

. . . [S]ince March, the area has been home to backhoes and salvaging equipment. What was once unheard of is now happening in southeastern Turkey -- in Cizre, in Silopi, in Kustepe and wherever else local lawyers have filled a petition to have the "death wells" opened. Turkish officials have now started to dig for the remains of Kurds who have disappeared. But the digging also means working through one of the darkest chapters in this country's history, when Turkish security forces waged a dirty war against supporters of the PKK and its suspected supporters.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, thousands of civil rights activists, politicians and businesspeople suspected of having ties with the PKK were kidnapped and murdered. No one knows their exact number, and it was only in rare cases that the victims were even identified. Many corpses were dumped into wells; others were doused in acid and thrown into fields. The horror of the sight was meant to serve as a deterrent. But the majority disappeared without a trace and are still listed as missing.

[ . . . ]

Other former henchmen of the state, such as Tuncay Güney and Yildirim Begler, are now talking about the war against the PKK. From the safety of exile in Canada, Sweden and Norway, men like these recount the names of the victims and the places where their mass graves can be found. They describe the bestial interrogation methods and the orders to kill that always came "from the very top." They talk about how the gendarmes would bathe the dead in acid baths and make them disappear in wells. And they never fail to mention the type of cars the Jitem usually used: white models of the Renault 12-based "Toros" manufactured in Turkey between the 1970s and 1990s. When the angels of death appeared in their white cars, inhabitants knew that one of their friends or neighbors would be disappearing soon.

At this point, HPG has extended its ceasefire until 15 July and we shall see what happens. Until then, this is a good time to prepare for any eventuality, which is exactly what I believe our comrades are doing.

Monday, June 01, 2009


"This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins."
~ George W. Bush.

Does anyone remember, back in the day, when this whole bullshit Global War on Terror, Inc., started up, Bush mentioned "crusade" in one of his early speeches and then everyone had to go around controlling the spin on that one? Well, that whole crusade-religious war thing wasn't too far off the mark, as it is now revealed:

In 2003 while lobbying leaders to put together the Coalition of the Willing, President Bush spoke to France’s President Jacques Chirac. Bush wove a story about how the Biblical creatures Gog and Magog were at work in the Middle East and how they must be defeated.

In Genesis and Ezekiel Gog and Magog are forces of the Apocalypse who are prophesied to come out of the north and destroy Israel unless stopped. The Book of Revelation took up the Old Testament prophesy:

“And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle … and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.”

Bush believed the time had now come for that battle, telling Chirac:

“This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins”.

[ . . . ]

The story has now been confirmed by Chirac himself in a new book, published in France in March, by journalist Jean Claude Maurice. Chirac is said to have been stupefied and disturbed by Bush’s invocation of Biblical prophesy to justify the war in Iraq and “wondered how someone could be so superficial and fanatical in their beliefs”.

There's a little discussion on that at Antiwar Radio, run time almost 23 minutes.

But it gets worse, as reported in Harper's:

Humphrey had been in Samarra for a month, and until that day his stay had been a quiet respite in one of the world’s oldest cities. Not long before, though, there had been a hint of trouble: a briefing in which his squad was warned that any soldier caught desecrating Islamic sites—Samarra is considered a holy city—would fall under “extreme penalty,” a category that can include a general court-martial and prison time. “I heard some guys were vandalizing mosques,” Humphrey says. “Spray-painting ’em with crosses.”

The rest of that Easter was spent under siege. Insurgents held off Bravo Company, which was called in to rescue the men in the compound. Ammunition ran low. A helicopter tried to drop more but missed. As dusk fell, the men prepared four Bradley Fighting Vehicles for a “run and gun” to draw fire away from the compound. Humphrey headed down from the roof to get a briefing. He found his lieutenant, John D. DeGiulio, with a couple of sergeants. They were snickering like schoolboys. They had commissioned the Special Forces interpreter, an Iraqi from Texas, to paint a legend across their Bradley’s armor, in giant red Arabic script.

“What’s it mean?” asked Humphrey.

Jesus killed Mohammed,” one of the men told him. The soldiers guffawed. JESUS KILLED MOHAMMED was about to cruise into the Iraqi night.

It would be interesting to know exactly who that Iraqi from Texas is. If they're all engaging in this kind of behavior, it's no wonder everyone wants to kill the interpreters and their families.

Again, there's an interview with Jeff Sharlet, the author of the Harper's piece at Antiwar Radio, run time almost 26 minutes. I happen to think Sharlet is a little too apologetic, a little too willing to engage in excuses or cutting slack for the American Taliban, but give it a listen and see what you think.

The Harper's article is longish but it will definitely reward the persevering with a good read. According to the piece, the source of Christian jihadism in the US military is within the officer corps. Still, given Bush's words to Chirac it's clear that this jihadi problem went to the very top of the administration, as a recent article in GQ with slideshow:

On the morning of Thursday, April 10, 2003, Donald Rumsfeld’s Pentagon prepared a top-secret briefing for George W. Bush. This document, known as the Worldwide Intelligence Update, was a daily digest of critical military intelligence so classified that it circulated among only a handful of Pentagon leaders and the president; Rumsfeld himself often delivered it, by hand, to the White House. The briefing’s cover sheet generally featured triumphant, color images from the previous days’ war efforts: On this particular morning, it showed the statue of Saddam Hussein being pulled down in Firdos Square, a grateful Iraqi child kissing an American soldier, and jubilant crowds thronging the streets of newly liberated Baghdad. And above these images, and just below the headline secretary of defense, was a quote that may have raised some eyebrows. It came from the Bible, from the book of Psalms: “Behold, the eye of the Lord is on those who fear Him…To deliver their soul from death.”

This mixing of Crusades-like messaging with war imagery, which until now has not been revealed, had become routine. On March 31, a U.S. tank roared through the desert beneath a quote from Ephesians: “Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.” On April 7, Saddam Hussein struck a dictatorial pose, under this passage from the First Epistle of Peter: “It is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.”

More from Britain's The Guardian.

There you have it again: The Crusades. What is it that these good Christian jihadis are up to in the territories they occupy? Britain's Telegraph spills the beans on that:

At least one picture shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

Further photographs are said to depict sexual assaults on prisoners with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube.

Another apparently shows a female prisoner having her clothing forcibly removed to expose her breasts.

Detail of the content emerged from Major General Antonio Taguba, the former army officer who conducted an inquiry into the Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq.

Allegations of rape and abuse were included in his 2004 report but the fact there were photographs was never revealed. He has now confirmed their existence in an interview with the Daily Telegraph.

General Taguba's report can be found here.

What the rest of us would call rape or sodomy is referred to by Americans as "enhanced interrogation techniques". Onward Christian jihadis! But what do you expect from people who treat their own in the very same way?

Naturally, the Pentagon denies the Telegraph story. But the Pentagon denied that Christian jihadis were trying to distribute bibles (in Pashto and Dari) in Afghanistan, too. That is, until the Pentagon issued a statement saying the bibles in question had been confiscated. And there's more on that, with video.

Now, what I would like is for someone to explain to me just how the US military, and it's political leadership, differs from Al-Qaeda, or the Taliban, or Ahmadinejad? These groups also use violence to force their ideology onto those who don't want it and, in Ahmadinejad's case, he's supposedly concerned about bringing about the coming of the Mahdi.

How does this:

World leaders had expected a conciliatory proposal to defuse the nuclear crisis after Teheran had restarted another part of its nuclear programme in August.

Instead, they heard the president [Ahmadinejad] speak in apocalyptic terms of Iran struggling against an evil West that sought to promote "state terrorism", impose "the logic of the dark ages" and divide the world into "light and dark countries".

The speech ended with the messianic appeal to God to "hasten the emergence of your last repository, the Promised One, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace".

Differ from this?

“This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins”.

It doesn't differ. Both are the very same thing and both are religious sociopaths that threaten the rest of the world at the point of a gun with their batshit insanity. It's disgusting and it's yet another reason to despise religion.