Jump to content


Photo

And the Fraud Had a Name


  • Please log in to reply
102 replies to this topic

#21 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 10:12 AM

The Slaughter of Gurgen Markarian

In the manner of Turkic invaders for over nine centuries where killing Armenians is an ordinary pastime – take the murder of an eight year-old boy from Berdashen by the “Azeri” headmaster of the school of the neighboring village in 1967 – on February 19, 2004 the human-shaped coward jackal, the “Azeri” Lieutenant Ramil Safarov, savagely hacked the Armenian Gurgen Markarian (Margaryan) to death while the latter was sleeping. At that time they were both following English courses in Budapest in the framework of NATO’s “Partnership for Peace” program.

Playing truant on an excursion six days before the murder, the monster bought an axe. After committing the despicable, racist act the thug tried to kill a second Armenian when he was stopped by other students who heard him cry that he was craving Armenian blood only, the motive of the murder of an otherwise total stranger. After a lengthy trial the scum was condemned to rot in prison.

Keeping in mind the context of this barbaric act, i.e. the NATO connection, the western media went totally dumb and not only no sign of condemnation, nor regret, nor even sympathy was to be discerned from the kind that had bred this atrocious creature, the genocidal Turk was praised in his native “Azerbaijan” on highest governmental level and was proclaimed “man” of the year.

Iskander Hamidov, former Minister of Internal Affairs of Azerbaijan for instance, bragged that “The more Azeris kill Armenians, the less Armenians there will be.”

Elmira Suleymanova, the Ombudswoman of Azerbaijan wailed: “ Safarov must become an example of patriotism for the Azerbaijani youth.” (Zerkalo, 28/02/2004)

Emin Hassanli, chairman of the Public Association for Enlightenment of Young Reserve Officers whimpered: “We think that he [Ramil Safarov] did right to kill the Armenian officer and protected the honour [!] of the Azeri officer in this manner” (Azer-Press, 24/02/2004)

This shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that the constant howling of the “Azeri” side concerning giving the “highest” possible level of autonomy to the Armenians of a de facto victorious and independent Artsakh within “Azerbaijan” are mere lies.


#22 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 10:23 AM

The Nakhijevan Destruction

Figure 13


Jugha Khachkars (Stone-Crosses) before destruction


Figure 14


Distant view of Jugha cemetery before destruction


Figure 15


General view of part of Jugha cemetery before destruction


Figure 16


Nakhijevan, December 2005 not 1905, 1915, 1918, 1920 or even 1988
Genocide in broad daylight, completely overlooked by the hypocritical “Christian” western states that would do anything for a few drops of oil

First of all it should be noted that 27,000 Armenian monuments of all kinds: churches, monasteries, stone-crosses, bridges, cemeteries, etc., have been accounted for by the scholar Argam Ayvazian in Nakhijevan alone and reports that have leaked from the illegally occupied province have confirmed that all the churches have already been razed to the ground, thus, no Armenian monument may actually be standing anymore in Nakhijevan.

In the exact manner of its progenitor Turkey where thousands of churches, monasteries and other Armenian monuments have been destroyed, especially since the end of WWII when the Turks feared that a victorious Russia would demand the return of Armenian territory ceded in 1921, similar methods of cultural genocide have been adopted in “Azerbaijan” and even in Christian Georgia. In the sick minds of these criminals, every trace of the millennia old Armenian presence all over the place must be erased lest someday the landlord might become strong and take back their property.

In December 2005 the “Azeri” usurpers of Nakhijevan resumed the destruction of what was left of the Khachkars also known as stone-crosses - a unique form of religious monument usually more than two meters high - of the Jugha cemetery to completely wipe any evidence of indigenous Armenians from their historic homeland of Nakhijevan, after they successfully conducted the ethnic “cleansing” of the province in front of the eyes of the consenting Soviet leaders.

Already in November 1998 and especially in November 2002 most of the Khachkars had been toppled and broken in pieces. Since this went unpunished as usual and organizations such as UNESCO did not show any concern, the genocidal occupiers finished their evil job in the final days of 2005 in broad daylight. In each case the atrocity could be seen and was photographed and videotaped from the Iranian side, yet to no avail.



#23 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 10:29 AM

Figure 17


Khachkars broken to facilitate the process of destruction


Figure 18


Khachkars toppled and cemetery ready to be destroyed

On the wrong side of the Arax River and spread over three hills, the Jugha (Julfa) cemetery, could easily be seen from the Iranian side. This matchless human treasure included thousands of khachkars, ram-shaped gravestones and horizontally laid tombstones that were constructed in an era spanning from the ninth until the beginning of the seventeenth century AD when the expansion had stopped as a result of the forced migration of Armenians of the region to Iran. Some scholars believe the cemetery existed in an even earlier period.

This unique circumstance would allow the archaeologists to study the evolution of this craft and the diverse influences that were incorporated in their motifs as a result of the region’s location along the Silk Route. This alone made the historic site part of the heritage of all humankind.

Figure 19


Khachkar details and ram shaped tombstone

Visiting the cemetery in 1648, Alexandre de Rhodes reported of the existence of 10,000 khachkars and ram-shaped tombstones. Burning Jugha to cinders to cut supplies for the Ottoman army, Shah Abbas did not touch the cemetery and it was only under the Russian rule when almost half of the monuments were dismantled and used as construction material to build the nearby railroad in early twentieth century. Indeed, a Muslim king had far more consciousness, respect and appreciation of art and culture than the Christian Russian rulers.

The fate of the cemetery did not rouse much envy in the Soviet era either. Nakhijevan was treacherously appropriated by Armenian hating “Azerbaijan” and the Armenian monuments were neglected, used for other purposes at best or were regularly destroyed and the demolition was proudly announced to the Soviet authorities who had declared the religious monuments reminders of a reactionary society that merited to be pulled down. Of course a fake state that never had a history or a civilization did not have anything to lose, better still, they got rid of the evidence of millennia old Armenian presence and received praises from the Communist leaders.

While already in the 1930s no working churches remained in Artsakh, the Tatar occupiers had no problem praying in their mosques in Shushi. In the same manner several Islamic schools indoctrinated the Muslims in Yerevan mosques while the Armenian churches were being destroyed under the pretext of construction. For instance the opera house and Moscow movie theater are built on ground where ancient churches stood.

The early Turkic invaders used to reduce the ancient Amaras monastery - originally built by Gregory the Illuminator where about a century later Mesrop Mashtots had opened the first school in Artsakh - to rubble time and time again. Legend has it that they would line soldiers up from the site of the monastery to the Arax River who then passed the broken pieces and threw them into the river so that the Armenians would not be able to rebuild Amaras; but then again, the brave people of Artsakh would raise the monastery from its ruins. Having witnessed the monstrosity in Jugha in the 21st century, one may reconsider whether this was a true account rather than a legend.

Figure 20


A well known Turkish tradition: thousand year old human heritage turned to rubble and thrown into the Arax

Starting December 10, 2005, the genocidal “Azeri” squatters sledge-hammered the already toppled khachkars, loaded the pieces on trucks and emptied the load into the Arax River. Later, in March 2006, the “Azeris” poorly camouflaged the site by turning it into a shooting-ground, wiping this unparalleled example of human culture off the face of the earth, the same way they had exterminated the indigenous people who had created it.

Figure 21


Prime example of Turkish cultural creative process

Incapable of creation or even appreciation of human culture the “Azeri” Turks have turned the 1200 to 1500 year old Jugha cemetery into a pile of rubble to erase every piece of evidence of the presence of indigenous Armenians in Nakhijevan who the “Azeris” have managed to evict in front of the indifferent eyes of the “modern”, “civilized” world.

This barbarity is without doubt:
I. Cultural genocide.
II. Desecration of religious symbols.
III. Destruction of centuries old priceless heritage.
IV. Annihilation of unique works of a unique art form, not found among any other people.
V. Disrespect to the dead.
VI. A desperate attempt to eliminate all evidence of a horrendous crime.
VII. A despicable attempt to appropriate land that belongs to others.
VIII. A coward act of savagery by a group that claims to be part of humanity and civilization.
IX. The continuation of the Armenian Genocide.
X. The irrefutable proof of the Armenian Genocide.

Figure 22


“Azeri” genius: genocide thinly covered up. A shooting ground built too close to Iranian border to ever be used, in place of annihilated proof of Armenian ownership of Nakhijevan



#24 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 10:35 AM

The Petroleum Policy and the Future of Artsakh

Sometime in late 1990s, on a KLM flight from Amsterdam to Tehran, I noticed that the majority of the passengers were westerners. The plane had a stop in Baku, pretty weird lengthening of destination, and lo, behold: all of the westerners left the plane in a hurry… The whole scene had a sinister effect on me. In those westerners I saw hungry wolves that would slay their own whelps for a few drops of oil in Gray Wolf land… And this partly explains the blatantly hypocritical and unjust attitude of the West toward the fate of the Armenians and all the monstrosities that befell them in the course of the Artsakh conflict. But is oil the only reason? Is there so much oil in “Azerbaijan” as it was initially propagated?

Looking back to analyze history and understand the intentions of players at the time leads to deductions that are not so obvious, to say the least. The most unlikely conclusions seem not so improbable on a second thought. Of diverse observations in relation to motives and purposes of the Armenian Genocide one theory maintains that the extermination of the Armenians served the emerging oil business in the West.

Armenians, the successful pioneers of Baku oil industry

Although by the 19th century Baku had become a majority Tatar city, Armenians had the upper hand in its industrial development. Like in all areas, recent “Azeri” histortion has entirely wiped any mention of the Armenian role in Baku oil industry where possible. In cases of personalities hard to ignore, for instance, the founder of the first Baku oil refinery in 1863 Melikoff (Melikian), they have given him the Muslim first name Javad (or Djavad).

In a research paper by Theodore Karasik sent to a certain online “Turkistan-Newsletter”, the editor of this proud first time publisher of the work admonishes the Armenians to behave like their forefathers who had an important share in Baku oil in the old days. Unwilling or unable to grasp that fake “Azerbaijan” did not exist back then, the self-righteous Turk thinks himself shrewd enough to give advice to Armenians to “return” Artsakh to the sore “Azeri” losers and perpetrators of genocide and war in return for empty wolfish promises of allowing them to become players in the game, whereas interestingly enough Karasik bares the treachery of stealing the industry from the Armenian pioneers introduced to the reader.

To avoid accusations of out of context quoting, though not all of the points discussed are directly related to our subject, a comprehensive picture of the paper and other articles introduced in this section will be given.

Karasik’s research tries to dig into the not so well known story of the gradual involvement of Imperial Russia in industrialization and Baku oil business, the major players including scientists and intelligentsia, the competition on ministerial level to attain the edge over the rest and the impact on the local businessmen: “This battle was fought between the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of War”. Minister of Finance “Reutern was the first to see the potential of petroleum [who] with the assistance in some cases from the scientist D.M. Mendeleev …wanted to implement several programs based on Baku's oil potential...[and] develop the Bakinskaia guberniia's refining capacities.... S. Goulishambarov, an Armenian with the Ministry of Finance, led a group of St. Petersburg chemists to work on resolving waste in the Baku oil industry.”

The author then names several Russians, among who Doubinin, Voskoboinikov, Kokorev and Witte, who tried their hand at the oil production as early as the region’s passing under Russian rule, but with primitive methods; en passant, quotes a certain John Mitzakis alleging that “[D.] Melikov, an Armenian workman, who started work on his own operation, stole his knowledge from Witte” the latter being the “father of the future Minister of Finance and later Prime Minister”, who got it from mainly Medeleev. “More importantly, however, was the race over acquiring the knowledge for petroleum industrialization in Bakinskaia guberniia in the upper reaches of the government between the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of War”.

Since the “Crimean War had exposed the weak and backwards state of military equipment, the overall lack of command, and poor training and morale”, Minister of War D. Miliutin wished to master the technology to cover the expenses of modernizing the Russian army. But St. Petersburg gave the preference to Reutern which “left the Ministry of Finance with uninterrupted influence in Baku's oil industry”.

He uncovers the anxiety of the Russians who attempted to kick the successful Armenians out of the business, “Kokorev had contacted Mendeleev about traveling to Baku to help him figure out new methods in oil extraction against the Mirzoev oil family”, but Mendeleev “perhaps one of the world's greatest scientists” refused to grant him his wish under the pretext that “Baku did not have the capability to produce kerosene at that time”. Karasik believes, “The truth may be that Mendeleev did not want to be part of Kokorev's plan against the Mirzoev's family”.

The article touches the main changes regarding the way land was allotted to the locals, “From 1821 to 1873, Russia employed the lease system ...The government, which made the exploitation of petroleum deposits a state monopoly, leased the oil fields to individual entrepreneurs....This [system] made large-scale operation impossible because the parcels were too small to permit the orderly recovery and production of petroleum ...Consequently, for Imperial Russia, the results from the Baku oil fields were poor due to weak technological advances”.

Land auction was the major modification that greatly influenced how things were done: “In 1872-1873, the Ministry of Finance ended the practice of granting oil concessions on state lands ...Local, Russian and foreign investors were now able to compete for purchasing oil tracts to the highest bidder”. Here he agrees with Villari that, “in terms of the competition between locals for the Baku oilfields, the Armenians won, by a large margin, over the Muslims after the land auction. ...the position of the Armenian families --the Aramiants, Lianozovs, Mailovs, Melikovs, Mirzoevs, Mantashians and the Tatevosyans-- expanded over the years. Part of the reason for this success can be attributed to the role Armenians played in Baku since they dominated many of the political and administrative functions in Bakinskaia guberniia.”

Yet this did not mean Muslims were left out: “the Asadullayevs, Maghiyevs, Mukhtarovs, Sultanovs, and the Taghiyevs” were successful in the business but on a much lower scale.

The Armenian Mirzoevs and the Tatar Taghiyevs are the ones about who enough data exists to draw a comparison. “From 1821 to 1825, [Mirzoev] paid the Russian government to export his petroleum. ...By 1863, he had expanded into the refinery business by building a factory near the Surakhany temple. ...In 1865 he made sure to adapt the emerging technologies from German scientists concerning photogens [giving] him the leading edge in Baku's petroleum refining at that time ...by the turn of the decade, Mirzoev had expanded his drilling operations to such a degree that the Russian government felt compelled to intervene through the oil auctions ...oil men such as Kokorev went into the competition determined to outbid Mirzoev and deprive him of his holdings” however, “Mirzoev succeeded in defending himself from these attacks.”

“Muslims did succeed in buying land during the auctions. But the Muslim funds invested in the leases did not exceed five percent of the total, while the share taken by the Armenians was ten times larger” Zeynal 'Abdin Taghiyev was an exception who “multiplied his fortune by investments in kerosene refining and branched out into extensive land and stock market speculations”.

Villari reminds us the reason for the lack of Tatar success and before Turks throw mud at him notice that he does not put the entire blame on them, “The Tartars are extraordinary backward in their development, and as ignorant and barbarous as any race in Asia; for this the Russian Government is largely to blame, as it has hitherto discouraged education among them, while they themselves seldom troubled to provide schools of their own”. Yet he admits that the Tatars “have taken no part in liberal and revolutionary agitations, strikes, and similar movements, because they are incapable of understanding the meaning of “progressive” theories, and cannot read the literature on the subject”.

From the distance of time we see a truth Villari could not entirely have observed. After all, the Young Turk movement too was initially welcomed by subjugated nations of the Ottomans including the Armenians: “Within the last few years a movement has been growing up among a small group of influential Tartar “intellectuals” to educate the people and create a national political spirit among them. M. Taghieff, the Baku millionaire, perhaps the richest Mohammedan in the world, Agaieff and Hussein Zadé, and Ismail Beg Gasparinsky”. The latter is one of the masterminds of pan-Turkism, the diabolical ideology exported mainly from the Caucasus to Ottoman Turkey. It seems this “intellectual” movement did not really serve to civilize the Turks but gave them the required dogma to wipe entire Christian nations from Armenia, Asia Minor and southeast Caucasus.

Perhaps unintentionally, Karasik commits a fallacy when he states that Taghiyev’s “financing of [the periodical] Kaspii …served as an outlet for Azerbaijani national aspirations as printed material became available on a regular basis in Baku”.

The author seems to hold an unbiased view yet reading between the lines it is obvious that he applies some auto censorship and erroneous anachronism, probably to make the article palatable to Turks in case he is knowledgeable of history. He regularly cites several sources from a period where no “Azerbaijan” existed north of the Arax River among them Villari’s “Fire and Sword in the Caucasus”, James Dodds Henry’s “Baku, an Eventful History” etc., where the Tatar savageries against Armenians have been described and the aggressors have always been referred to as Tartars. Yet as seen in the passages above, for instance, regarding the periodical Kaspii financed by Taghiyev we notice while Villari is talking about “a small group of influential Tartar “intellectuals” …propagated their ideas …in a Baku paper called the Kaspii” the article refers to it as “an outlet for Azerbaijani national aspirations”.

It is impossible to forcefully pass fabricated history. Karasik, under the heading “Clan System Influence” clearly states, “For Muslims, life in Bakinskaia guberniia was based on a clan system of khanates...The Muslims were described as follows:

Their natural instincts are in favour of absolutism, and they acquiesce willingly in their old feudal and tribal system.” The last sentence is from Villari; further: “Consequently, based on the clan structure, the Muslim owners assembled an impressive collection of police and security forces” These were given free hand, they were “armed to the teeth, …belonged to one and the same clan, and looked quite sinister and brutal. These people were the most pampered children of the oil industry; everything was granted to them: furlough, money, presents --even women, for it was owing to this guard that a certain degree of peace reigned on the oil fields and in the works.”

The whole description of these tribal hordes living according to a clan system and using fear tactics to maintain peace is in stark contrast with earlier claims of “national aspirations”, therefore, every attempt to conceal the stink of a concocted history is rendered futile.

The convenient interchange of terms: “Azeri”, “Azerbaijani”, Turk, Muslim, etc. whenever the need arises is also a cunning technique of camouflage by these fakers yet the well informed reader will easily work out the sham. The purpose of our exposé is exactly the debunking of the “Azeri” myth of an ancient “Azerbaijan” empire stretching from one end of the universe to the other, existing quadrillions of eons before the Big Bang, hence, the emphasis on this sort of deceptively unimportant details.

The very lack of a civilized identity is the cause that these primitive Tatars could not shake off their ancestral habits. This is brought to light by Karasik under the heading “Technology Adaptation and Crime”: “An example of thievery during this period involved tapping existing oil pipelines. …Essey-bey tells an interesting story of how small Muslim producers acted against each other and the larger firms during this period”. The story reveals the cunning of oh no, not some lowly, poor rascals, but the most “civilized” of these Tatars, “the well-known captain of industry, Riza, a worthy gentleman who sought culture most assiduously, traveled abroad every year, and was considered the upholder of the European civilization” who stole everyone’s oil by connecting the pipes from the common reservoir near the refinery where the oil was sent to proper reservoirs of each company to his pipeline “so that their oil simply flowed into his line, to be booked as a product of his oil-derricks when it entered the reservoir”.

Karasik’s essay goes on to relate the sad story of the raid of oil sniffing rapacious predators: Nobels and later Rothschilds, “that resulted in many local firms going bankrupt”. The locals failed for their lack of mastering the new technologies, though they tried to reproduce the Nobel technology by putting up a network of “jerry-built, leaking, and ill-fitting pipes that often were the target of midnight raids where Muslims would switch oil from another producer’s pipe into their own, diverted lines into their own storage tanks, or simply let the oil run out into the sand.” Civilized Europeans and uncouth Tatars, like always, worked hand in hand to destroy Armenians and their interests; however, it did not mean that Turks were always happy with their lot.

The transport of oil was done by mule driven carts (arabas) providing thousands of Tatars their livelihood working as drivers. The Nobel pipeline transfer put them out of work which inflamed their craving for revenge “the drivers attacked Nobel facilities. eventually, the Nobels had to protect their property by appointing their own security and constructing sentry boxes every few hundred yards since “infuriated [Muslims], whose lucrative business they had destroyed, did damage to their lines.””, no acts of vengeance coming from Armenians though, whose entire business evaporated in due course despite initial attempts to join the Nobels.

Karasik concludes by summing up his essay into three points where he incidentally remarks, “by 1882-1883, locals accused foreign investors of trying to monopolize the industry and they looked increasingly towards the state for protection--but with no help forthcoming. …As production grew, the gulf between foreign companies, the government, oil producers, and the workers grew and turned towards violence by the turn of the century”.

The most notable Armenian in Baku oil business was Alexander Mantashian (Mantashev, Mantasheff 1849-1911), son of a merchant, Hovhannes, born in Tabriz later settled in Tbilisi, who entered big oil business in late 19th century. He was also the major shareholder of the Tbilisi Commercial Bank. His own “A. Mantashiants and Co. Trading House” had a 30 million ruble capital in 1914. His business had branches in several cities of Russia, Poland, Turkey, Romania, Britain, France, Egypt, Iran and India; he owned steam ships, real estate and houses making him the richest man of the Russian Empire.

He built diverse petroleum plants and refineries and held shares in many other oil companies as well including the Nobels. He was a magnanimous giver too and donated funds or built several establishments, schools, churches, theaters, etc. He also funded the Baku-Batum, the world's longest pipeline of the day, which was launched in 1907, a century before the BTC. His company was only second to those of the Nobels and the Rothschilds.

After his death, his sons transferred the company from Baku to Petersburg in 1913 and had the misfortune to be contemporary of that half Tatar mongrel agitator Lenin’s “revolution” that plundered them, stole their riches and put an end to Mantashian’s business. Even his memory was unwelcome to the Bolshevik robbers and the mass-murdering Georgian ogre Stalin’s right hand psychopathic rapist, the Georgian executioner Beria destroyed the cemetery where Alexander Mantashev was buried.


#25 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 10:37 AM

Searching for the reasons behind western antagonism

With this background, the antagonism of the westerners in Baku towards the Armenians becomes self-explanatory. How on earth an ethnicity from the inferior “eastern” races dared to compete with the owners of the world? It is quite unambiguous that the sly and voracious Rothschilds and Nobels could not tolerate this at all.

In an article by Clifford Shack comparing the events of two world wars, the oil interests of the Caspian and the Suez route, we read, “In the 1880's, the French branch of the Rothschild family acquired interests in Russia's Baku oil fields in an effort to supply their refinery on the Adriatic with cheap Russian oil. In exchange for these interests they built a railroad linking Baku to the newly acquired Black Sea port of Batum. This opened up the Baku oil, a major world supply, to the world. It had previously been geographically locked in by the mountains of the Caucasus …With the success of the new railroad, the Rothschilds had more oil than they could actually sell. Overcoming their fear of competing with the giant Standard oil, they sought out the huge markets east of Suez.”

Then Shack introduces a certain Marcus Samuel, who could “help them penetrate these markets …When the Rothschilds proposed to sell their oil to Samuel …understanding the competition with a foe like Standard oil, he ...understood that he needed to sell his oil at a cheaper price …by designing bulk tankers which were safe enough to pass through the Suez Canal. Standard’s costs would be much higher as they transported their oil around the tip of Africa …In 1892, Samuel's coup would unleash forces that would shape the history of mankind. His first oil tanker picked up its load of Baku oil from the Rothschild's Batum refinery and sailed through the Dardanelles and on through the Suez canal to the far east where the Shell oil company became, overnight the predominant supplier of Kerosene replacing Standard oil. The great Standard world monopoly had been busted.”

Later all the forces of evil join their might, “with addition of the Royal Dutch Petroleum Company …The new company, British Dutch Petroleum, would soon be joined by the Rothschilds forming the Asiatic Petroleum Company, later calling itself the Royal Dutch/Shell Group which would eventually join Standard Oil and the Nobels in a worldwide oil cartel.”

Here Shack touches the subject of the Armenian-Tatar Wars, “The decision by the shrewd French Rothschild branch to diversify into other areas of oil exploitation was, presumably, a calculated one. Three years after they joined Royal Dutch, production at Baku would come to an abrupt halt in 1905 …due to the violence of the ethnic conflict between the region's Moslems (i.e. Tatars, the “Azeris” of today. H.) and the minority population of Armenians who are Christians. This ethnic conflict caused the first interruption of oil distribution to the world market. Standard oil was quick to supplant the needs of the effected markets…”

Shack believes that sacrificing a mere million or so Armenians was a small price to pay for securing the interests of these ravenous hyenas. “The Royal/Dutch/Shell Group (and the Nobels) watched their Baku investments go up in flames. …to eliminate the possibility of that happening in the future …Standard had to be taking notes as well; they couldn't afford to ignore the lessons of Baku.”

Shack asks a rhetorical question, “To an all-powerful banking family like the Rothschilds, whose vast wealth bankrolled many a war, causing millions of fatalities... was the removal of a small minority like the Armenians a fair price to pay for the peace in a region so crucial to the development and investment of the Far East, which contained countless millions, later billions of consumers? Squeamish the Rothschilds were not, their line of work requires pragmatism to rule their day.”

“The mere elimination of the Armenian population of Baku would not solve the problem of ethnic conflict in that region.” While by early 20th century the Armenians had become scattered all over the “empire” they were relatively numerous in the Armenian vilayets and regarding the “Muslim” population surrounding the Armenians Shack allows a miscalculation, “It is here interesting to note that there is no malice on the part of big business in their decision to erase a population. It is simply easier to erase a million than tens or hundreds of millions of the surrounding Moslem population”.

Not counting the unknown millions of Turkified Armenians who were forced into Islam since as early as the 16th century, the Armenian population of the “empire” could not be under three million before the Hamidian Genocide in 1890s. The underestimation of Armenians all over the Empire of Rape has been discussed in the section More Lies from a Warmongering Loser; certainly, after WWI, the population of the remainder of the Ottoman Tyranny counted 13 million, only 8 million of which were Turks. The hundreds of millions of Muslims of the area have never had a problem concerning the Armenians, stronger, it were the Arab countries severed from Turkey who accepted the Armenian survivors of the Genocide with open arms.

In his enthusiasm Shack slips on the oily ground and goes a bit off track, “Of course, history tells us that it was the Turks, and not big business that committed the Armenian atrocities. However, if one looks closely, one would find that the Turks owed more than one favor to the French government which aided Turkey in it's recent past. It was Napoleon III who fought for Turkey's entrance into the concert of Europe. France took the lead in Turkey's economic development with French securities and investment exceeding that of any other nation.”

Yet again the Turks are put off the hook, but it is worth considering what Shack says between the lines, “…a constant behind France's economic power was the French branch of the Rothschild family. Napoleon III was a Rothschild man. Specifically, Baron James de Rothschild's man. Baron James was, financially and hence politically, the most powerful figure in France, indeed on earth during his time. Napoleon's efforts on behalf of Turkey were Rothschilds' efforts. The question arises. Was the Armenian genocide an obligation demanded by Turkey's creditor? The Armenian massacres of 1894 and 1896 occurred merely two years after Baku oil first began to flow through the Suez Canal to the Far Eastern markets. Armenians were living within the Ottoman Empire for hundreds of years (the indigenous Armenians were living in their home and the conditions they had to endure under Turkish tyranny were abysmal. H.), how incredible fortuitous for the oilmen that ethnic hatred would heat up to such a pitch as to consume their population! The Armenian genocide, during World War I, brought stability to the Baku oil region. A further accomplishment of World War I was the successful demise of the Ottoman Empire. The oil fields of Mesopotamia were to be brought under British “protection”.”

Before passing to another Shack article where he further elucidates this British appetite for Mesopotamian oil let’s observe a flaw in Shack’s conclusion. He is apparently not familiar with the history of the Armenians under a millennium or so of Turkish barbarity, otherwise, he would not entirely put the blame on the Rothschilds and exculpate the Turks as mere tools for executing the Armenian Genocide, however, his point has a certain truth to itself, while the oil wolves can not be held the sole responsible for the Armenian Genocide, they certainly helped the Turks by giving them the green light. This may in part explain the indifference of the West towards the plight of the Armenians, even today, in relation with the Artsakh issue where in spite of the Armenian victory in an unjust war perpetrated by “Azerbaijan” under direct orders from Turkey, a cynical double standard is applied where the Armenians are concerned.

In another article, gathering the scattered pieces of the puzzle, Shack asserts that to have an effective foreign policy, the constant strengthening of the British naval power and converting the fuel for the British Navy from coal coming from Wales into oil coming from exotic places was an absolute necessity for the British Empire.

Since the oil production in Britain did not exist back then the Admirals were reluctant at first “but the French branch of the Rothschilds were, together with the Rockefellers, supreme rulers of the oil business having entered into a world cartel with Standard Oil, now Exxon. Oil revenues would be an important source to the financial power base of these global elitists as they pursued their dreams of world conquest. Britain would be manipulated to give up its native fuel supply and rely on an energy source half way around the world. Squeamish admirals be damned!” according to Shack.

He believes one major character in this game was no other than Winston Churchill who on June 17, 1914 “introduced a bill proposing that the British government invest in an oil company. With a vote of 254 to 18, the British government acquired 51 per cent of Anglo-Persian …By the summer of 1914, the British Navy was fully committed to oil and the British government had assumed the role of Anglo-Persian's majority stockholder. Oil, for the first time, but certainly not the last, had become an instrument of national policy, a strategic commodity second to none.”

To maintain a secure supply of oil from not so secure places Churchill had called for diversification of sources therefore, besides Persia, oil from Mesopotamia had to be obtained as well. “To achieve this aim, the Ottoman Empire would first have to be dismantled …This task would be accomplished by the keepers of the Concert of Europe -the House of Rothschild. The global elitist device that achieved this objective was World War I.”

Shack contends the common belief of historians that the Dardanelle campaign was a failure: “During World War I, Churchill was in charge of the Dardanelle campaign [which] was a crowning success for the war planners. For not only did the Dardanelle campaign spell the beginning for the end of the Ottoman empire, but the feigned bungling of the operation set in motion a series of orchestrated events that would empower the Turks to execute the Armenian genocide.”

“With the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the huge oil fields of Mesopotamia came under British control” which, keeping the “balance of power” in mind of course, led the victorious scavengers into dividing Mesopotamia between themselves and designing the so-called Middle-East to ensure a constant flow of oil to feed the insatiable beast from the west. Enter Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Kuwait with “puppet-kings” installed and ready to leech.

In the Armenian-Tatar Wars section it was seen that the Armenians “with their superior education, their greater intelligence and push” were the major contributors of the development of Baku and its oil industry and had an important influence in the business. This aggravated the westerners and even led to hateful utterances against the Armenians where one prominent Englishman had personally told Luigi Villari that “he would be glad to see the whole Armenian nation wiped out!” a wish that came true not so long afterwards.

Once again in the context of the Armenian-Tatar Wars, Shack concludes that “Eliminating the Armenian presence in the Baku oil region eliminated the ethnic conflict between the region's Moslem majority which actually interrupted the oil production in 1905, when the oil fields were set ablaze.” It is unmistakably clear that the Armenian competition was not desirable by the conceited westerners.

In an interesting article, an excerpt from his book, Peter Dale Scott also draws the attention of the reader to the relationship between the major western oil companies and the so-called terrorist networks that did nothing but carry out the orders given to them by these very companies.

He points out the “Al Qaeda activities in Central Asia in the 1990s [and] the extent to which they involved both American oil companies and the U.S. government …the U.S.-protected movements of al Qaeda terrorists into regions like Afghanistan, Azerbaijan and Kosovo have served the interests of U.S. oil companies. In many cases they have also provided pretexts or opportunities for a U.S. military commitment and even troops to follow.”

“To gain access to the petroleum reserves of the Caspian Basin” thought to be “the largest known reserves of unexploited fuel in the planet” Peter Dale Scott notices a continuous US policy toward destabilizing the former Soviet republics right from the Reagan era and the Afghan War, the first Bush Administration preparing for the construction of a pipeline bypassing Russia and the Clinton administration expressing these goals “more as matters of national security”.

He emphasizes that “…In one former Soviet Republic, Azerbaijan, Arab Afghan jihadis clearly assisted this effort of U.S. oil companies to penetrate the region. In 1991, Richard Secord, Heinie Aderholt, and Ed Dearborn, three veterans of U.S. operations in Laos, and later of Oliver North's operations with the Contras, turned up in Baku under the cover of an oil company, MEGA Oil.[14] This was at a time when the first Bush administration had expressed its support for an oil pipeline stretching from Azerbaijan across the Caucasus to Turkey.[15] MEGA never did find oil, but did contribute materially to the removal of Azerbaijan from the sphere of post-Soviet Russian influence.”

Further introducing these mercenaries Scott goes on: “As MEGA operatives in Azerbaijan, Secord, Aderholt, Dearborn, and their men engaged in military training, passed “brown bags filled with cash” to members of the government, and above all set up an airline on the model of Air America which soon was picking up hundreds of mujahedin mercenaries in Afghanistan…Meanwhile, Hekmatyar, who at the time was still allied with bin Laden, was “observed recruiting Afghan mercenaries [i.e. Arab Afghans] to fight in Azerbaijan against Armenia and its Russian allies.”[20] At this time, heroin flooded from Afghanistan through Baku into Chechnya, Russia, and even North America.”

More importantly, “In 1993 the mujahedin also contributed to the ouster of Azerbaijan's elected president, Abulfaz Elchibey, and his replacement by an ex-Communist Brezhnev-era leader, Heidar Aliyev”, someone experienced enough to counter the Russian opposition to the objectives that left them out.

“At stake was an $8 billion oil contract with a consortium of western oil companies headed by BP” mainly for the construction of the Baku-Israel pipeline better known as Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan. “The Arab Afghans …were set on fighting Russia in the disputed Armenian-Azeri region of Nagorno-Karabakh, and in liberating neighboring Muslim areas of Russia: Chechnya and Dagestan.[24] …As the 9/11 Commission Report notes (58), the bin Laden organization established an NGO in Baku, which became a base for terrorism elsewhere. It also became a transshipment point for Afghan heroin to the Chechen mafia, whose branches “extended not only to the London arms market, but also throughout continental Europe and North America (Cooley, Unholy Wars, 176).””

In relation with the sources that financed the mujahedin operation Scott adds, “According to police sources in the Russian capital, 184 heroin processing labs were discovered in Moscow alone last year. “Every one of them was run by Azeris, who use the proceeds to buy arms for Azerbaijan's war against Armenia in Nagorno-Karabakh,” [Russian economist Alexandre] Datskevitch said.”

It can clearly be seen that the shift from relative neutrality to the active supporting of “Azerbaijan” despite all the atrocities committed against the Armenians was the waking interest of the West in Caspian oil.

Scott further quotes from a White House Press Statement by Clinton in 1997, “In a world of growing energy demand, our nation cannot afford to rely on a single region for our energy supplies. By working closely with Azerbaijan to tap the Caspian's resources, we not only help Azerbaijan to prosper, we also help diversify our energy supply and strengthen our energy's security”.

Yet the initial euphoria proved to be wishful thinking or maybe a political bluff. In any case the ambition soon proved to be impossible to materialize. The whole point in duping the greedy British Petroleum into building the pipeline is nothing but a PR stunt to superficially increase the importance of Turkey, something Turks have been true masters of for centuries.

A confessional from June 1, 2006 by Stratfor confirms this in full:

“The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline, a year behind schedule and some 30 percent over budget, is now a reality …the approximately 1,118 mile, $4 billion line has already begun operations, with crude already pouring into storage tanks overlooking the Mediterranean Sea.”

Describing the maximum 1 million barrels per day throughput of BTC by 2008, Stratfor admits that oil coming only from fake “Azerbaijan” will not suffice unless the other “half” comes from Kazakhstan.

“That was not the original plan. Initially, the bulk of the BTC crude was expected to come from Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan's reserves, however, did not live up to the hype, requiring an expectations adjustment”, confesses the author of the article.

Not explaining the real reason for building the disadvantageous pipeline the author vaguely states, “Regardless, the BTC project went ahead as planned” and not being able to hold back a sigh of relief continues, “it was damn lucky Kazakhstan was brought on board …Kazakh and Azerbaijani authorities expect to finalize all the agreements needed to make this arrangement possible before the end of June.” In the meantime it is already well known that Russia has not sat still watching this business that ignores them succeed and Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan have jumped overboard this sinking oil tanker.
Further revealing the drawbacks he admits, “Such a business plan makes one wonder about the economic underpinnings of the BTC -- and well it should. Of the various means of shipping crude out of the Caspian region, the BTC is the least economically viable. Not only does the BTC negotiate three states, it also traverses long stretches of mountainous territory.” (All emphases are mine. H.)

The confession goes on, “It would have been far easier, cheaper and faster to simply link the Azerbaijani oil fields north into the Russian pipeline network or south into the Iranian network. Throwing in Kazakhstan, which is on the wrong side of the Caspian Sea, left economists doubly perplexed.”

Doubting the purpose of the pipeline the author wonders, “Moreover, the line ends on the Mediterranean, a body of water whose littoral states already have enough oil. Caspian crude is needed in Asia, not Europe”.

The punch line, as far as our subject, and the real purpose of the scam as far as the artificial isolation of Armenia is concerned come next, “Before the pipeline even gets out of Azerbaijan, it must skirt around the secessionist region of Nagorno-Karabakh, which broke from Baku during the transition from Soviet rule.” If Artsakh “broke from Baku” when “Azerbaijan” was no independent state it cannot be considered a “secessionist region” but the blindness and double standards of these scoundrels must have already become well known to the least politically aware.

Apart from the sneaky stealing - with the help of these same British - of Javakhk from the Armenians when they were busy fighting the Turkish invading hordes in 1918, it is truly regrettable that Christian Georgia that owes their alphabet, Christianity, Bagratuni dynasty and the building of Tbilisi, to point out but a few facts, to the Armenians has become a concubine of the Turks offering every pore in her body as the gliding path of pipelines and railways that bypass the shorter route, Armenia.

It is obvious that every nation should act in its own interests but this dangerous game that the failed state of Georgia has embarked on may not serve those in the end. Only recently an “Azeri” official boasted that since the “Azeris” grow very fast in numbers and the Georgian population growth is low, soon there will be no Georgians and “Azerbaijan” will take their land. It would be amusing to know what the Georgians think of this pan-Turkic outburst.

The Stratfor article carries on, “In Georgia, things are far worse. There, the BTC was routed to avoid not one, but three restive regions. The first two -- South Ossetia and Abkhazia -- broke away from Tbilisi in 1993. Even after 13 years of on-again, off-again ethnic cleansing, more ethnic Georgians live in these regions than Ossetians or Abkhazians, respectively. The other region -- Samtskhe-Javakheti (Samtskhe from Somekh meaning Armenian in Georgian H.) -- is an ethnic Armenian enclave that, while still part of Georgia, hosts a Russian military base that poses a challenge to Georgian sovereignty over the region. And while Georgia and neighboring Chechnya consider themselves on the same side in the sense that they both oppose Russian activity in the region, Chechen fighters played a decisive role in fighting against the Georgians in the Abkhaz and South Ossetian secessionist wars”.

The military base is history as of now, yet In stark contrast to the rebelling regions, the stolen Armenian province of Javakhk with its majority Armenian population larger than that of South Ossetia (approx. 70,000) or Abkhazia (approx. 160,000), where admitted by the Stratfor experts in spite of “ethnic cleansing, more ethnic Georgians live in these regions than Ossetians or Abkhazians” has shown considerable patience and restraint.

Despite the unconcealed fear of the West reflected in this article, the Armenians of Javakhk have constrained their dissatisfaction towards Georgian discrimination to civilized demands in the category: the Armenian language receive the status of the second language in the province, roads be repaired, Armenians participate in any area of public life, Armenian teachers be employed in the (dilapidated) schools, the ban on teaching Armenian history be removed, recreation centers be built for the youth, etc., which in the case of language have either been vehemently rejected or in other cases empty promises have never been fulfilled.

While the Georgian state begs on their knees to provide autonomy for South Ossetia and Abkhazia if they accept to remain part of Georgia, any mention of eventual autonomy for Javakhk coming from certain associations in the province is severely rebuked.

Further on, the article believes that the money will only serve the three countries involved to threaten the “secessionist” regions “to assert the power of Ankara, Tbilisi and Baku over Diyarbakir, Sukhumi, Tskhinvali, Akhalkalaki and Stepanakert -- giving all of those secessionist regions reason to want the BTC offline”.

“So why build an economically questionable and militarily insecure project?” asks the author: “The answer is geopolitics. The Soviet Union's dissolution left Azerbaijan and Georgia shattered and impoverished …The American European solution was to link the two states in an east-west corridor to themselves and Turkey, rather than simply allow them to languish in Russia's shadow or fall into the orbit of a resurgent Iran …As the project was specifically designed to cut Russia out of the loop, one can easily imagine what the Russians would like to see done to the pipeline. And considering Moscow's cordial relations with these secessionist …regions, one can equally easily imagine what tools could be brought to bear against the pipeline”.

The article concludes with the citing of the percentage of the shares of the project, “The single largest investor in the BTC, as well as the oil fields in Azerbaijan that will help fill it, is supermajor BP Amoco … BP (30.1 percent), the State Oil Company of the Azerbaijani Republic (25 percent), Unocal Corp. (8.9 percent), Norway's Statoil (8.71 percent), the Turkish Petroleum Corp. (6.53 percent), Italy's ENI (5 percent), France's Total (5 percent), Japan's Itochu Corp. (3.4 percent), ConocoPhillips (2.5 percent), Japan's Inpex Corp. (2.5 percent) and Amerada Hess Corp. (2.36 percent)”.


#26 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 10:39 AM

The double standards of the “international” community

Despite the horrors and the all-out war the “Azeri” criminals waged that wiped all the Armenian population all over fake “Azerbaijan”, the people of Artsakh, on the verge of the same sad destiny, were condemned to defend their home and succeeded against all odds to repel the intruders and liberate parts of their homeland, correcting the wrong brought on them seventy years prior, albeit partly. If the echoes of the “international” community regarding the “Azeri” barbarities did not go beyond meek admonishing of the murderous Turks, ever since the Armenians got the upper hand in the unjust “Azeri” aggression, the humanitarian mask fell and the anti-Armenian smear campaign started to take shape.

Indeed, the loss of the launching pads that shelled the innocent Artsakh civilians with Grad missiles on a daily basis for months, especially the extinguishing of the fire from Khojaly in February of 1992, hastened this disinformation crusade which gave birth to that nasty hoax where Armenians who have suffered nine centuries of massacre and destruction at the paws of the nomadic hordes from Turkistan were portrayed as perpetrators of the most common rites of Turkish culture.

This continued to become more malicious as the Armenians were conquering one lair where the cowards were bombing the civilians from, after the other. Especially the liberation of the Berdadzor (Lachin) corridor and the ancient Armenian fortress city of Shushi on May the ninth which connected Artsakh to motherland Armenia was hard to swallow for the traditional friend of the Turk. It is astonishing that as long as Armenians are being persecuted, mutilated, burned and massacred, these defenders of “human” rights feel sorry yet don’t move a finger. But watch out if the Armenians take arms to defend themselves against the frenzied bloodthirsty hordes… No, they do not seem to count as part of humanity who has a right to protect their lives and if they do so they will soon be labeled as aggressors.

This is nothing new. The same thing went on for the handful acts of self-defense in the days of the Armenian Genocide. Especially that of Van in 1915 has been constantly used by the Turks to justify the extermination of an entire nation. This is because several thousands of inhabitants of Van, the capital of Armenia of three thousand year ago, managed to escape the scimitar of the Turk exactly as a result of this act of self-defense.

The appalling losses of the “Azeri” “counter-attacks” to re-usurp the liberated territories despite constant international admonition to stop the hostilities, forced them into their cunning abuse of Armenian forgiveness and magnanimity. The “Azeri” losers begged for ceasefire which they alas and alack got, the latest to date (2008) having been signed on 11th of May 1994 in Bishkek between republics of Armenia, Artsakh and “Azerbaijan”.

While the Artsakh issue has been de facto resolved in spite of areas of Artsakh and Armenia including Shahoomian, Gandzak and Artzvashen still remaining under illegal “Azeri” occupation, the diplomatic carnival was entrusted to CSCE (Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe) which later went a name change for the sole purpose of “resolving” the Artsakh issue, i.e. the signing of a worthless piece of peace paper in return for the abandon of Artsakh independence by the Armenians. The first C became an O, meaning organization, hence the impotent, pro-Turkish OSCE came into being. The assignment of the issue to this body, consequently the exclusion of the UN, was a sly move that ensured that one of the major powers having borders with the involving parties, Iran, had no place in the “negotiations”.

The preparations for peace talks that had to take place in 1992 in Minsk led to the mediator team’s appellation, the Minsk Group: the pack of clowns who go back and forth from Baku to Yerevan to Stepanakert to Yerevan to Baku to keep the circus a running. The three stooges of this bunch of jesters are representatives of Russia, France and a belated United States. The current joker from the US is the loose-lipped Matthew Bryza, a Turkophile with a Turkish wife that from time to time trumpets his delusions and wishful thinking concerning the urgent “solution” of the conflict in Turkish interests of course.

It is noteworthy that Artsakh was initially a negotiating party which also signed the ceasefire treaty, yet the brazen “Azeri” losers have disallowed Artsakh from participation and ferociously reject calls for it to be part of “peace” talks, deviously misleading the international community towards degrading the whole issue into a territorial dispute between Armenia and fake “Azerbaijan” and directing the talks to certain deadlock, all this with the connivance of the OCSE slackers and the interested powers. How on earth can an issue be solved without the involvement of the main subject of the conflict?

It does not matter if the Turks lose a war; they always get support from the Anglo-Saxon world to turn their misfortune into their benefit. This happened after the Russian victory over the Ottomans in 1878, where Armenian generals also played an important role in taking parts of Turkish occupied Armenia. The peace treaty of San Stefano with its beneficial article 16 was rejected by the British under influence of the Disraeli, leading to setting up of the Congress of Berlin to literally reverse the fortune of the Armenians with its article 61… While Kars, Ardahan and Batum remained in Russian Empire, Alashkert and Bayazid were “returned” to the Turkish losers so that British commercial interests would not be disturbed. Once more the hopes of the Armenians to get rid of the Turkish yoke were shattered by the avaricious “Christian” world.

History is repeating itself. The latest paper produced by the Minsk Group is totally derogatory for a victorious side. It is astonishing that the Armenian side constantly announces they agree with the principles of the document. Although the “mediators” insist on the secrecy of the talks, the essential points of the demeaning agreement have “leaked out” as a result of loudmouth Bryza’s fervor. Unsurprisingly the very first point concerns territory, the reason for the Armenian Genocide, Artsakh conflict being an integral part of this never ceasing plot. They are approximately as follows:

I. Armenian troops must evacuate the “occupied” territories of “Azerbaijan”.

While there is not a single mention of the release of Artsakh territories occupied by the “Azeris” with the help of the Soviet Russian army, this will nullify the security buffer, exposing Artsakh and Armenia to the caprices of murderous “Azeris”, who will comfortably use their positions to shell and air bomb Artsakh yet again and get it over with for good.

II. The “Azeri” “refugees”, that are exceedingly inflated to one million, a lie that has been rejected even by pro-Turkish organizations, should “return” to the so-called mountainous Artsakh and the surrounding territories.

It is beyond belief that such reeking double standards are imposed on the winner of the war. Whereas there is no mention of around 400,000 Armenian real refugees who were brutally expelled from their home all over fake “Azerbaijan”, and seeing the persistent hatemongering coming from all levels of “Azeri” hierarchy, the cruel murder in his sleep of Gurgen Markarian and the glorification of the murderer, the destruction of Jugha cemetery which shows that the Turks do not even have mercy for the dead Armenians, how on earth do these OSCE fools believe bringing a million “Azeris” to Artsakh can guarantee the safety of around 150,000 remaining Armenians of the region?

Incidentally, when do the Armenians have to go back to their homeland? 93 years of exile are not enough? What's the hurry for the “Azeri” intruders?

III. “Peace” keepers should be deployed in the ceded region, i.e. in Armenian land.

Since the ceasefire in 1994, “Azeri” soldiers have continuously broken the treaty and have fired into the Armenian side killing many soldiers and civilians so why not peacekeepers in the “Azeri” side where peace is not kept? Experience shows the moment the Blue Helmet mercenaries are brought into a similar conflict they turn the region into a brothel, not to forget their total ignorance of the local customs and their ill treatment of the natives.

IV. After an indefinite long period, usually thought to be between 10 to 20 years, the people of Artsakh will hold a referendum to decide Artsakh's future: independence or “return” to “Azeri” yoke.

Without an explanation coming from the “mediators” for the need of such waiting time, as if the seventy years of “Azeri” persecution and twenty years of war and fragile ceasefire were not enough, this is obviously meant to give the “Azeris” time to further increase their numbers and enact their pan-Turkist plans of harassment of the Armenians. Despite this, the defeated “Azeri” war criminals stubbornly put forth the outrageous condition that the referendum be held all over fake “Azerbaijan” rather than only in Artsakh and the losers still unabashedly consider the acceptance of this point a compromise from the “Azeri” side.

Amusingly enough, the Turk projects its uncompromising stance and accuses the Armenians of inflexibility. The participation of the principal side of the conflict, Artsakh, in the talks is vehemently disallowed by the defeated side and the Armenians who are imprudently ready to cede historically Armenian territory liberated through colossal sacrifices to the loser of the Turk perpetrated war are the “bad” guys where the brazen Turk is unwilling to give a finger.

The problem is, the worthless “peace” paper thus obtained will not have any benefit for the Armenians because it won't end there. Emboldened by their gains despite their abysmal defeat, the Turks will not abide by the dictates of any such treaty and just like they have broken every promise since the Ottoman days, they will first demand Zangezur to have access to occupied Nakhijevan and engulf Armenia in a deadly Turkish quagmire. This will definitely be the end of Armenia, hence, the wily insistence of the pro-Turkish western powers to get the liberated territories “back” on all accounts.

The role of the so-called expert non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the hands of whose doubtful behind the scenes puller of strings are as obvious as the sunrise, has to be taken into account as well. Regardless of the field these groups are specialized in, as far as the Artsakh issue is concerned, their inhomogeneous choir wails the same cacophonous disharmony of the urgent ceding of the liberated lands to the “Azeris”.

No matter whether they have “Human”, “International”, “Freedom”, “Democracy”, “Justice” or what not benign sounding term in the name of their club, never a single word of comfort, not even lip service or at least a drop of crocodile tear has been expended for the victims of Sumgait, Baku, Gandzak, Shahoomian, Maragha, etc. The anti-Christ vampires that they are, not an utterance of regret has escaped their miserly lips concerning the destruction of centuries old, priceless Christian heritage in Jugha cemetery, a fact backed even by video footage, catching the vandals red-handed on film.

While we are on the subject, the burning of some dry weeds somewhere in the liberated area, determined by the independent observers to be caused by summer heat, or possibly by reckless “Azeri” shootings, aggressively propagated by the “Azeris” in countering the nonexistent objections for their annihilation of Armenian monuments, gets the attention of the European Union and a certain René van der Linden with a soft spot (somewhere on his cadaver for sure) for the Turks regretfully articulates: “Such cases caused by one of the parties to the conflict are very unpleasant”, while neither he nor the other Draculas would ever consider talking about the documented destruction of Armenian stone-crosses in Jugha.

To the timid complaints of the Armenian statesmen to such barbarities, where they should in the least have flown a helicopter gunship to the area and shot the “Azeri” soldiers busy sledge-hammering the monuments or even less, have stopped the “negotiations” and demanded the matter be condemned by the international community, the “Azeris” violently retort with lies like the “forest” fires or destruction of ancient “Azeri” “heritage” by the Armenians. How on earth a “country” that is less than a century old could possibly have ancient heritage? The tent-dwelling Tatars of the Caucasus buried their defunct members and put a small stone they found lying around on top of the grave of the dead nomad with no inscriptions or signs of any kind. After some time these “cemeteries” were covered by soil and were lost. One wonders, whether anybody would want to waste precious time to find these architectural masterpieces let alone squander energy to destroy these wonders.

If there are any old mosques in the area that were not destroyed in the Stalin era years after the destruction of churches of course, they were built by the Persians when the eastern part of Armenia was under Persian rule and it is a fact that the Armenians have never been destroyers of monuments of others. Stronger still, the mosque of Shushi still stands and the Blue Mosque of Yerevan was renovated by the Iranian government.

Similar ignoring of hate propaganda and exculpation of Turks by European officials are the predictable response to every meek criticism from the Armenian government. The constant desperate howling of sultan Aliev and vizier Abiev (or Abiyev “Azeri” minister of war) are the order of the day: waging war, announcing the destruction of Armenia in less than twenty years, delivering lectures, fabricating history that in the era when they were slaughtering tens of thousands of Armenians of Baku and Shushi “Azerbaijan” offered the “Azeri” khanate of Erivan (!) to Armenians in 1918, where they finally founded their state for the first time in history. The historic founding of the Erebuni fortress where the name Yerevan comes from, in 782 BC by the Armenian king Argishti I, 27 centuries before the counterfeiting of fake “Azerbaijan” and around two thousand years before the ill day the hoofs of the Turks desecrated the civilized lands west of the Caspian must have escaped the infallible memory of the second “Azeri” monarch.

Such rabid tirades full of hatemongering fall on selectively deaf European ears or are somehow justified. To “the concerns of Armenia’s Prime Minister in connection with the militant propaganda in Azerbaijan” the “EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus” a rogue called Peter Semneby puts the Turks off the hook calling it “the work style of Azeri media” barefacedly lying, “But recently it seems that nothing similar is noticed in Azeri President Ilham Aliev’s approaches”. In the best cases, a fallacious equation of “both sides should refrain from war rhetoric” is the harshest they can get.


#27 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 10:51 AM

Debunking the “International” Crisis Group (ICG)

Organizations such as the so-called “International Crisis Group (ICG)” that are neither fish nor meat, issue decrees that invariably condemn, threaten or smear the Armenians or demand the immediate evacuation of the liberated territories. Initially the orders were churned out through the braying - with a raucous imperative pitch - of Alain Délétroz. Currently (2007-2008) Sabina Frazer or Sabine Freizer, inconsequentially married to a Turk, is the official bugle that quacks these anti-Armenian resolutions discharged by this irresponsible lot. Below some examples:

Smear: “Level of Destruction of the Occupied Azerbaijan Territories Considerably Above, Than We Saw on the Balkans” this masterpiece from “Azeri” sources is attributed to Sabina Frazer which exposes the crude double standards this good for nothing bunch of leeches utilize for their anti-Armenian propaganda.

Threat: Recently, in November 2007, ICG issued another prophesy in the row, the same Sabina Frazer said, “Armenian leaders also think that time works for them and de facto independence of Nagorno Karabakh will become a reality that can’t be neglected. However, the wait-and-see policy represents a menace. The year of 2012, when Azerbaijan’s oil income can reduce and the military adventure can seem a tempting way to distract popular attention from the economic crisis, promises to become the most dangerous year. Vital oil and gas pipeline stretching nearby Karabakh will be the first victims of the new war. This is a scenario Europe and the United States want to prevent”.

Condemnation and orders to Armenians: While Shahoomian and other occupied territories of Artsakh have been resettled by “Azeris” and all Armenian monuments have been destroyed, this nobody group of rascals is telling the Armenians, “3. The de facto Nagorno-Karabakh authorities should end support for settlement of formerly Azeri majority areas with Armenians, including by:

(a) stopping privatisation of land, homes and businesses in those areas;

(b) ceasing to establish local administrations and infrastructure in the occupied areas adjacent to Nagorno-Karabakh; and

© protecting the remaining Azeri homes.

4. Armenia should encourage the de facto Nagorno-Karabakh authorities to take a more conciliatory stance on resolution of the conflict”.

Sympathy and despair for the warmongers: from the same bride of a Turk, “Before the Rambouillet meeting there was a bigger hope for peace, start of withdrawal of the Armenian forces from the seized territories and return of the Azeri displaced persons to their homes in mid 2006 or early 2007. Now this hope is vague while the mediators announced of their intention to stop activities for some period”.

From an ICG report, 11 October 2005, “…Key elements of that proposed settlement package include the withdrawal of the Armenia-backed Nagorno-Karabakh forces from the occupied districts of Azerbaijan surrounding the entity; the renunciation by Azerbaijan of the use of force to reintegrate the entity (Wow, what a smart bargain for Armenia! H.); the deployment of international peacekeepers; the return of displaced persons; and the re-opening of trade and communication links. Nagorno-Karabakh's status should ultimately be determined by an internationally sanctioned referendum with the exclusive participation of Karabakh Armenians and Azeris, but only after the above measures have been implemented. Until then Nagorno-Karabakh would remain part of Azerbaijan (Why? Already a generation has grown up in a de facto independent Artsakh; can you convince them to give up their freedom for “Azeri” genocidal oppression? H.), though in practical terms it would be self-governing and enjoy an internationally acknowledged interim status.”

Compare this with “Azeri” Defense Minister Safar Abiev’s whimpering, “If Armenia wants to attain mutual confidence, it must withdraw its troops from the occupied Azeri lands, refugees must be allowed to go back to their homes, infrastructure of the occupied territories must be restored. This conflict must be resolved within Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity”. No Comment needed.

So who are behind this bunch of nosey nichtsnutzes?

Registered in the US but operating from Brussels, this blatantly pro-Turkish “NGO” was founded in 1995 by a staunch defender of Turkey’s accession to EU membership Morton Abramowitz (Abramovich), who among other posts had the honor to be the US ambassador to Turkey in the period 1989-1991 and the first President of ICG. Allegedly created to help prevent and solve conflicts in the world, this subversive organization has offices in Washington, New York, Moscow and London. Among the financers of this supposedly non-governmental nonentity, apart from western governments from North America and Europe, we see, surprise-surprise: Turkish foreign ministry. Naturally, the billionaire George Soros (Schwartz), ever present in stirring up “colorful” revolutions in former Soviet “republics”, also greatly helps this group.

Among the co-founders are former US Senator George Mitchell, involved in a scandal regarding privatization of Azeri State Oil Company and the scoundrel Stephen J. Solarz who received US$ 400,000 from Turkey for lobbying in the US lawmakers’ environment to defend the Turkish interests. He acts as vice chairman of the gang and has a house in Turkey too. Board Member Uta Zapf is a German MP, who among other activities is the president of German-Turkish Parliamentarians Group. Not surprisingly, she too is an ardent fighter for the EU membership of Turkey. The Turkophile Emma Bonino could not be absent from this illustrious mob either. Her website has a separate section dedicated to Turchia as well, with a splendid photo of her surrounded by a huge Turkish flag on the left and that of EU on the right side of her head, serving as the glorious banner of the page.

Other ICG members are: the Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk whose Interpipe also operates in “Azerbaijan” since 2000. Kenneth Adelman, member of American Committee for Peace in Chechnya; Wesley Clark, Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander; and Zbigniew Brzezinski, among numerous other occupations also a board member of the United States-Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce (USACC).

It still gets better; among other Turk oriented members of ICG, two come from Independent Commission on Turkey (promoting its membership in the EU): Martti Ahtisaari (chairman) and Bronislaw Geremek. From an article by these douche bags “Turkey in Europe: More than a promise?” on page 10 we read:

“Turks entered Anatolia in the eleventh century and gradually established the Ottoman Empire, leading to the conquest of Constantinople in 1453. They became heirs (since when stealing means inheriting? H.) not only to Byzantine and the Eastern Roman Empire, but also to a rich Greco-Latin and Judeo-Christian culture in Anatolia. (Where does the “Judeo” come from? H.) Names such as the ‘father of history’, Herodotus of Halicarnass; Aesop, who inspired La Fontaine’s fables; Lucullus, the patron of gourmets; Saint Nicholas, bishop of Myra and ancestor of our Father Christmas; and Croesus, who became the richest man of his time, are connected with this region, as are places like Troy, Pergamon, Ephesus, and Mount Ararat (stolen in 1921. H.) where Noah’s Ark came to rest. Saint Peter preached to the first Christian community in Antioch. Tarsus was the birth place of Saint Paul, who made his first missionary journey to Anatolia, extending Christianity beyond the limits of Judaism and thereby laying the foundations of a worldwide religion. All this reminds us that the region which today is the heart of Turkey was one of the cradles of European civilisation.” (All emphases are mine. H.)

We could surmise from the undertone of this eloquent pile of puke since Saint Nicholas, distorted into Santa Clause, hails from Turkey before Turks entered Anatolia, man-eating fiends from Tugril and Alp Arslan to Chingiz and Timur, from Osman and Orkhan to Selims, Abdulhamids, Talats and Kemals of this world were just Ural-Altaic personifications of Father Christmas who were doing nothing but delivering candies and presents, wherever their hoofs trampled, to the civilized indigenous nations. The misunderstanding emerged only through cultural discrepancies where Turkish candies were more or less scimitar shaped and unlike sweets, the means of their consumption was not through melting in the mouth rather caressing the neck that unintentionally chopped off the heads of the beneficiaries.

Talking of Father Christmas… I do not believe this Turkophile bunch could have the slightest idea about the Armenian king Trdat’s (Tiridates I) journey to Rome in 66 AD to be crowned by Nero, where he refuses to worship the Roman gods and introduces the Iranian cult of Mithraism instead. Christmas, along with most of Christianity’s symbolism: the Aryan (Iranian) cypress (replaced by the pine), pope’s miter, the virgin Birth, the concept of the savior Messiah (Saoshyants), the halo around Christ’s head alluding to his being God (Mithra, the Sun), is the remnant of Mithraism. It is celebrated on December 25th of every year, i.e. around the winter solstice which is the birthday of Mithra (Mitra, Mehr, Mher, the Sun) in most Christian countries but not in Armenia itself where it is held on January the 6th, the same day as the Epiphany, so chosen from ancient times to convince the people to give up their pre-Christian customs.

Besides the fact that this fervent eulogy, marveling at the immense feats of the Turks and their contribution to European civilization, even though admitted by the full of awe (or awful) eulogizers themselves the events and personalities presented here all pertain to eons preceding the epoch “Turks entered Anatolia in the eleventh century”, fails to elucidate the hypothetical inquirer what happened to all those Christians who laid the “foundations of [this] worldwide religion”, it sickeningly disregards one of the most significant elements of that cradle of civilization.

Not a word! Not a single word about Armenia, the entire eastern half of Turkey, the Garden of Eden where the Judeo-Christian god created Adam and where he saved humanity from the flood. Not a word about Armenians, the first Christian nation in the world, the first defenders of Christianity in the first war for freedom of speech in 451 when, led by Vartan Mamikonian, they rebelled against the Sassanid king of kings Yazdgerd II who had ordered the Armenians and Aghvans to give up Christianity and worship the fire of Mughan.

Not a word about the largest Christian population of the Ottoman Tyranny and the builders of the same. Yet this paragraph wants to convince us that Herodotus, Aesop, Lucullus, Saint Nicholas, Croesus, Saint Paul and what not were Turks and Turks were the founders of the European civilization who built the Ephesus, millennia before the hordes of primitive, nomadic, cattle-herder, tent-dwelling, cities to cinders razing, churches to rubble reducing, all destroying Turks set their paws in the region…

Figure 23

Click on the image for a larger version.

Armenia, the birthplace of humanity and where humanity was saved from the flood, from a Gospel published in 1634 in London (of all places!)

For the curious: the 51 page PDF format article does mention the term Armenia once: On page 21, under the misleading heading “Turkey has achieved more reform in just over two years than in the whole of the previous decade”, the Turk friendly authors reluctantly let out the word in a context of denial of the Armenia Genocide:

“Turkey’s rapprochement to the EU should have beneficial effects on relationships with other neighbouring states. In particular with regard to Armenia, it is to be hoped that the opening of borders and an improvement in bilateral relations (there are no relations when Turkey has imposed a blockade on Armenia which amounts to an act of war. H.) may become possible, including Turkey’s recognition of the tragic events of the past in the spirit of European reconciliation.

To put the lid on this reeking trashcan let us consider the view of a Serb. According to Dejan Lučić, “Important Rothschild companies in this region are Carlyle Group and the International Crisis Group which, led by Soros, [have] been campaigning for independent Kosovo for years. In addition to Soros, the group is financed by Rupert Murdoch (Sky), Goldman Sacks, JP Morgan... Members of this group are or were Marti Ahtisari, James Lion, Morton Abramovich, Louise Arbour, Bzezinski, Wesley Clark, Mihail Hodorkovski, Thorvald Stoltenberg... The staff [has] changed, but not the anti-Serb policy”.

This brings us to yet another case of applying double standards where Armenians are concerned. I do not support the comparison between Artsakh and other superficially similar conflicts, but since the “Karabakh-Kosovo” analogy appears more often than not, it is not irrelevant to our subject to examine this a bit deeper.


#28 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 10:58 AM

The Artsakh-Kosovo comparison

From the Bryce report of the atrocities of 1915 we read, “The reverse side of the picture is the uprooting of the nation from its native soil. The immigrant tribes from Central Asia did not make a permanent lodgment in the Armenian homelands. Some of them drifted back into Azerbaijan (the real H.) and the steppe country along the coast of the Caspian and the lower courses of the Aras (Araxes H.) and the Kur (the fake, still not called “Azerbaijan” as late as 1916. H.); others were carried on towards the north-west, along the ancient Royal Road, and imposed the Moslem faith and the Turkish language upon the population of Central Anatolia. The Armenian plateau, entrenched between Tigris, Euphrates and Aras, stood out like a rock, dividing these two Turkish eddies. Nevertheless, the perpetual shock of the Seljuk and the Mongol raids relaxed the hold of the Armenians on the plateau. The people of the land were decimated by these invasions, and when the invaders had passed on beyond or vanished away, the terrible gaps in the ranks of the sedentary population of Armenia proper were filled by nomadic Kurdish shepherds from the south-east, who drifted into Old Armenia from the mountain girdle of Iran, just as the Albanians drifted into the Kossovo Plain from their own less desirable highlands, after the population of Old Serbia had been similarly decimated by the constant passage of the Ottoman armies”.

Needles to say, this reminder of history shows that Artsakh, the eastern part of “the lower courses of the Aras and the Kur” was not the native land of the “immigrant tribes from Central Asia” nor Old Serbian Kosovo belonged to Albanians where they “drifted into …from their own less desirable highlands” nor Old Armenia with its present day derogatory appellation “Eastern Anatolia”, where the “nomadic Kurdish shepherds from the south-east …drifted into …[from] the mountain girdle of Iran” can legitimately be considered part of Kurdistan, a state that never existed throughout human history.

Yet the most flagrant double standards are at work as soon as some Armenian officials dare to bring up the desirability of applying the outcome of the Kosovo conflict according to western aspirations to Artsakh. The cold response that comes from imps like Council of Europe Secretary General Terry Davis is that “Artsax is different”.

Although the comparison may not be favorable to Artsakh in case Kosovo independence is not recognized by all nations at least in the near future, let us see through only a handful of examples how much Artsakh Armenians deserve their self-determination more than the Kosovo Albanians.
  • I. While Armenians are indigenous to Artsakh from the dawn of history the Albanians only “drifted into” Kosovo a few centuries ago.

  • II. While Artsakh has never been a part of an independent fake “Azerbaijan”, this nonentity having been artificially counterfeited on Armenian territory in 1918 and having illegally snatched and held on to Artsakh and Nakhijevan from an internationally recognized Republic of Armenia through Turco-Bolshevik perfidy when these states were under Soviet occupation, Kosovo has been an integral part of Old Serbia.

  • III. While Armenians had to defend themselves against “Azeri” genocide and war with the help of Al-Qaeda, Chechen and Afghan terrorists, Ukrainian and other Slavonic mercenaries and Soviet Russian army, NATO aerial devastation of Christian Serbia with the help of Al Qaeda terrorists on the ground secured the victory for the Muslim Albanians and caused further decimation of Serbia.

  • IV. While Artsakh had an autonomous status within the USSR, however superficial, Kosovo never had any status of the sort, therefore it did not have recourse to legal processes that such a status would provide to secede from Serbia.

  • V. While in that light and according to international law it is Kosovo that must be regarded as a separatist province, this cannot be applied to Artsakh which was illegally colonized in 1921 by a mini Ottoman “empire” that at the demise of the USSR declared itself the successor of the “Azerbaijan” republic of 1918-1920, where neither Artsakh nor Nakhijevan were parts of. The legal cessation of Artsakh from the yoke of the occupier is a mere loss of one of mini Ottoman’s unlawfully annexed colonies.

  • VI. While using the legal processes provided by the USSR law, Artsakh declared the creation of NKR republic on September 2, 1991, when “Azeris” started shelling Stepanakert, and the Artsakh people decided the fate of their homeland through a referendum On December 10, 1991, with 99.89% voting for independence, no such referendum was held in Kosovo and the independence was declared unilaterally on February 17, 2008, with a host of powerful western states interested in decimation of Serbia to weaken Russian influence in the Balkans recognizing this illegal act immediately.

  • VII. While Armenians have protected their liberated homeland by themselves since 1994, international peacekeepers have ensured the safety of Kosovo Albanians.

  • VIII. Most importantly, while the reason for the Artsakh movement was the unbearable discrimination and persecution under oppressive “Azeri” yoke, the destruction, according to the Bernard Lewis plan, of Yugoslavia, the most liberal state in communist era which “threatened” to become a pro-Russian Germany in the middle of Europe and the weakening of Serbia were the principal motives of the Balkan wars.

Despite these blinding facts, the nauseating rejection of any consideration for the will of victorious Artsakh people from the western camp reeks of prejudice and exposes the emptiness of terms such as democracy, liberty and humanity. Truly, these are open to interpretation according to the whims of those who hold the reins of establishments pretending to work for peace, equality, justice and freedom and their trumpets known as “independent” mass media.



#29 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:00 AM

Israel boosting “Azeri” mythology

Abulfazl Elçibey: “Israel could help Azerbaijan in Karabakh problem by convincing the Americans to stop the Armenians”

Right from the downfall of the Soviet Union, Israel’s interest in the Turkic states of the former USSR, especially Azerbaijan, led to ever growing relations between the two in fields as diverse as economic, diplomatic, intelligence and military.

Of course, Caspian oil, especially its transport bypassing regional powers non-desirable to Israel, namely Iran and Russia was a major factor in the calculations but the traditional Judeo-Turkish friendship since the Ottoman days, the need to find allies in the hostile Islamic world and the similarity of the two states in a struggle for asserting their nationhood given their short history, also play essential roles in the rapprochement.

Right away it should be explained that exactly the same way the “Azeris” keep the balance not to annoy the bear in their courtship of the West unlike the head-on confrontation of the Georgians, Turkish conniving diplomacy regarding Israel has at the same time drawn criticism from the latter of the cautious engagement of “Azerbaijan” in its relations, the most obvious being the nonexistence of an “Azeri” embassy in Israel. Definitely, the friendship of the two is viewed with distrust and angers the Muslim states especially Saudi Arabia and Iran. In parentheses, let it be told once again that on one hand “Azerbaijan” plays the dirty religion card to revile Armenia in Islamic conferences, on the other hand establishes close relations with the states most deprecated by the Islamic world.

It seems the doubt expressed in the Stratfor article above to the profitability of the BTC pipeline dissipates and the motive for the initial hype created around Azerbaijan's oil reserves is justified when the Israel-“Azeri” alliance is considered in this context.

The online exposé “Israel and Azerbaijan's Furtive Embrace” by Ilya Bourtman appeared on Middle East Quarterly’s summer 2006 edition. All in all the article shows it’s about more than oil, revealing even more the reasons for sexing up the importance of the phony state and weaving fables around the infinitude of “Azeri” oil reserves to justify the construction of BTC. Bourtman surprisingly confesses that “Israel aimed to exploit the region's energy resources by lobbying for the development of gas and oil pipelines that would help its allies and circumvent its foes”. The chief reason for the bogus state’s courtship of Israel according to the author: “Desperate for outside assistance, Baku turned to Israel to provide leverage against a much stronger Iran and a militarily superior Armenia”.

Exaggerating for the nth time the weight of the Armenian lobby when its only power is the truth, Bourtman admits that Israel’s myth manufacturing machine which truly influences US policy always comes in handy for the coward, genocidal Turks: “Israel's foreign ministry vowed to lend its lobby's weight in Washington to improve Azeri-American relations, providing a counterweight to the influential Armenian lobby. According to Azerbaijan's first president, Abulfas Elçibey, “Israel could help Azerbaijan in [the] Karabakh problem by convincing the Americans to stop the Armenians.” …On several occasions, Heydar Aliyev, Azerbaijan's president between 1993 and 2003, personally requested military assistance from Israeli prime ministers”.

A representative of a country whose creation is justified by its people’s suffering, Bourtman apparently does not experience pangs of conscience by Israel’s assistance to the killing machine of the pioneers of genocide, “Following its loss in Nagorno-Karabakh, Baku reached out to Israel for help in rebuilding its military. Israeli defense firms obliged, selling Azerbaijan advanced aviation, antitank, artillery, and anti-infantry weapon systems”. Nothing can stand in the way of love. There are rumors that “undisclosed Israeli weapons system was being sent to Turkey where it would be assembled and then delivered to Azerbaijan” according to the author.

Obviously, the bad news is the article keeps up and amplifies the “Azeri” disinformation about “20 percent of Azerbaijani territory …occupied by an Armenian army”, the fairy tale claiming an ancient “Azeri” nation cut in two when he asks the rhetorical question, “how can Azerbaijan be “the Azeri state” when close to 20 million Azeris¬ almost twice its population¬ live in neighboring Iran?” and the claptrap of the sort.

While 20 million is not so far from three times the population of fake “Azerbaijan” with all its non-Turkish minorities taken into account, considering the Turkish speaking Iranians subjects of a “state” that was only counterfeited less than a century ago when their own land south of the Araxes was called after Atrpat (Atropat) more than 2300 years ago is absurd. Let us be reminded once more that the real Azarbaijanis lost their original Pahlavi Persian language some five centuries ago as a result of Turkic domination in the region, but their affinity is to their homeland Iran and not to the fabricated nonentity of the tent-dwelling Tatars of yesterday turned “Azeri” around mid 20th century AD.

To the good news: the article gathers a considerable amount of information regarding the relations between Israel and Azerbaijan. The “two countries formally established relations in April 1992, one year after Azerbaijan declared its independence”. These manifested themselves in close cooperation with Israeli intelligence granting “Israeli officials a defensive platform in …a country 93 percent Muslim”, and in big business such as Israeli brands: Strauss ice cream, Maccabee beer, Motorola Israel mobile phones, etc., inundating the “Azeri” market, the Bezeq telephone company becoming the highest shareholder in “Azeri” telephone company since 1994, installing phones all over the country. In addition, “Israeli firms built and guard the fence around Baku's international airport, monitor and help protect Azerbaijan's energy infrastructure, and even provide security for Azerbaijan's president on his foreign visits …Israeli intelligence maintains listening posts along the Azerbaijani border with Iran …dozens of Israeli companies operate in Azerbaijan, especially within the energy sector …Indeed, Israeli-Azerbaijani trade now outweighs the trade relations Israel has developed with the countries of Central Asia by at least a factor of five”.

As far as oil and gas are concerned it is confirmed that the whole BTC affair could comfortably be called the Baku–Israel pipeline, bearing in mind the input of “major Israeli entrepreneurs such as Shoul Eisenberg” and Yossi Maimon, the latter being “instrumental in brokering gas pipeline deals throughout Central Asia, such as the March 1999 $2.5 billion pipeline deal from Turkmenistan to Turkey. He boasted to The Wall Street Journal in 2001 that “…Controlling the transport route is controlling the product.”[31] Israeli strategic thinkers expected that establishing friendly ties to Azerbaijan would not only provide energy security but also allow Jerusalem to influence pipeline routes, a benefit both to Israeli political clout and a factor to strengthen Israel's allies at the expense of its adversaries”.

The whole truth: “The ultimate route of the $3.2 billion (went higher in the end H.) Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, for example, circumvents Iran and Russia (mainly Armenia since they can hardly hurt the two cited powers. H.) and ties secular, pro-western Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey (it’s that you say they are secular… H.) together in a way that enhances Israel's strategic interests, an aspect acknowledged by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in 1997[33] and recognized in Azerbaijan as well.[34] Rafael Abbasov, former director of economic and trade development at the Israeli embassy in Baku and now an economics officer at the Asian Development Bank in Azerbaijan, believes that …“In terms of oil, Israeli firms are a lot more involved than at first meets the eye …Often they register as U.S. or U.K. branches and thus enter the Azerbaijani energy market and participate in bidding for tender contracts.”[35]”

In spite of this rosy outlook Bourtman regrets that, “To date, Azerbaijan has not yet fulfilled its promise to open an embassy in Israel”. In politics at least it seems the Turks are even wilier than the masters of shrewdness. He whines, “After fifteen years of diplomatic relations, the two countries have not signed a single official treaty. As one senior Israeli diplomat laments, “There is no formalization of these relationships. Not even a cultural agreement, or tourism. Formal relations have not yet yielded one single agreement between the two states.”[39]”. Yet this section ends with the happy note: “Perhaps the only successful diplomatic initiatives have been in youth exchanges. …The Azerbaijan-Israel Youth Friendship Society works to promote youth relations through the teaching of each others' histories”. My, my I can’t help imagining the thick baloney made according to halal Islamic slaughter and kosher at the same time being fed the receptive Israeli youth about the millions of eons old ancient “Azerbaijan” empire.

Here it goes, a predator impersonating a lamb “Kanan Seyidov, the society's deputy chief of international relations, explained that the program works to explain “the real situation of Israeli people living under the everyday terror threat, and the impact of Armenian aggression (in form of civilized demonstrations replied by barbaric expression of Turkic customs in Sumgait in 1988. H.) and occupation on Azerbaijan (a counterfeit state that occupies 20% of historic Armenian territory H.).”[41]”.

A non-negligible part of the article also focuses on the Islamic terrorism which the author believes threatens both states, and the need to counter its infiltration in “Azerbaijan”. Given the fact that “Azerbaijan” used Al Qaeda, Afghan and Chechen terrorists against the Armenians as early as in 1992 and the US used them in the Balkans against Christian Serbia, the perpetuating of the already insipid story of “war on terror” to justify every misdeed by the West makes the examining of this section superfluous for our subject. Suffice mentioning this to be clear of quoting Bourtman out of context.

A whole section is devoted to the players of the Bogus Oil Adventures in “Azeriland” doing everything to outdo one another, what necessitated the promotion of Israel-“Azeri” cooperation. Between the lines Bourtman throws slime at the Armenians to undermine their victory. So, citing dubious sources in his introduction of the cast, Iran “has engaged in arms trafficking with Armenian separatists[43]”, or calling Turkish Daily News (Dec. 28, 1998) to the witness stand he “exposes” “Moscow's support for Armenian guerillas in Nagorno-Karabakh.[53]”. Further, “The Azerbaijan-Israel relationship has successfully shut out the influence of Persian Gulf states in the Caspian”. It seems these two are at war with half of the world yet Artsakh people do not have the right of self-determination in their tiny homeland, classic intolerance for the thorn in someone else's eye ignoring the log in their own rear.

Before we forget, there is still one “important” actor, “Among regional countries, Turkey has benefited most from the development of Azerbaijani-Israeli cooperation. When the Soviet Union disintegrated, Turkish officials began wooing Azerbaijani politicians ¬stressing their shared ethnicity, language, and Armenian experiences.[61]”

And what Armenian experiences does Bourtman vaguely allude to? That both manifestations of the same disaster have exterminated the Armenians, squashing them under their paws wherever their hoofs have trampled upon or the Turkish myth of Armenians having committed genocide against the Turks killing 2.5 to 3 million (and growing) from each variant when millions of armed to their teeth Armenian women, children and elderly, every caravan of several hundreds of them watched by only a handful of “gendarmes” recruited from thugs newly freed from prisons, walked like sheep to roast in the desert and could not even kill their “guides”? Considering the dubious source, the “Turk” posing as Swede Svante E. Cornell, educated at the Middle East Technical University, Ankara, holder of an honorary doctoral degree from the Azerbaijani Academy of Sciences it seems Bourtman has the second “theory” in mind.

To demonstrate the support of this triumvirate of evil for one another, recounting a certain “Caspian Sea incident” in July 2001 he boasts: “the Iranian warship Geophysics 3 threatened an Azerbaijani oil exploration ship in the Caspian Sea. As emotions and militaries flared, Turkey issued a statement promising to defend Azerbaijan.[65] It was clear that Israel would also take part. As an Israeli defense minister who was in Turkey shortly thereafter insisted, Israel would have joined the triumvirate against “Iranian aggression.”[66]”.

Last but not least, “The U.S. government also remains a player. Baku cooperated with Jerusalem in the hope of improving ties with Washington.[68] …In 1992, the United States Congress passed the Freedom Support Act promising economic and humanitarian aid to all the former Soviet republics except Azerbaijan. Muscled through by the Armenian lobby (there we go again! Ilya Bourtman, haven’t you heard of the Grads being fired daily on Stepanakert? H.), Section 907 of the act legislated that Washington would not give aid to Azerbaijan until the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.[69]”

Showing whose lobby is the strongest Bourtman pats himself on the back, “As Hassan Hassanov, Azerbaijan's foreign minister, stated in 1997, “We don't conceal that we rely on the Israeli lobby in the U.S.”[71] This paid dividends when, in 2002, President Bush waived Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act.[72] In a rare and understated public admission, an official at the Azerbaijani embassy in Washington acknowledged that, “Jewish organizations made a certain contribution in the Section 907 waving process.”[73]”.

Ending his exposé in the same tone of dissatisfaction from the “Azeri” cold feet: “One Israeli diplomatic likened the relationship to that between “a virgin and a gentlemen caller she wants it but is afraid.”[85]”. Or the horrendously old and ugly prostitute I mention elsewhere who’s selling her decomposing self at an exorbitant price.

The shrewd Israeli statesmen are confused: “Israeli politicians, while always calling for closer cooperation with Azerbaijan, have become frustrated with Azerbaijan's cold feet. Some high-level Israeli diplomats privately wonder whether state interests or personal interests such as business contacts with senior Iranians are driving Azerbaijani officials away.[86] They wonder whether Arab refusal to support pro-Azerbaijani U.N. resolutions regarding issues such as the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute may erode Azerbaijani resolve.[87]”.

If not all of these relations could be seen as direct animosity towards Armenians, the falsehoods spread all over western media in paper, waveform or digital formats have taken a life of their own, given the weight of Israelis and other Jewish personalities involved in journalism, TV and radio.

Regrettably, fairytales such as “Northern Azerbaijan/Southern Azerbaijan”; the total baloney about a nation cut in two when never in human history the Iranian people of real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) have ever been called Tatars nor the roaming leftovers of Oghuz invasions promoted to Tatars in the beginning of the 19th century, or any group or tribe for that matter, were ever referred to as “Azeri” before the 1930s; the revoltingly distasteful Khojaly hoax, especially its shameless juxtaposition to the Armenian Genocide and the trivializing of it; the mathematically impossible, ridiculous claim of 20% “occupied” “Azeri” land without mentioning the liberation of the 9% supposed “Azeri” territories being the direct consequence of the “Azeri” aggression beside the fact that historically and legally it has been Armenian land; and last but not least, the fable of one million “Azeri” refugees aiming at future usurpation of Artsakh by suffocating the Armenians by their constructed majority, do have a negative effect and greatly advance the “Azeri” smear and hate campaign against Armenia where the losers were unable to achieve their genocidal aims through war and extermination. The beast of pray has been portrayed as the victim of the Armenian aggression and the entire Artsakh liberation movement has been reduced to an ancient territorial dispute.

These falsehoods are greatly advanced by history prostitutes such as the Israeli intelligence agent, the author of “Borders and Brethren: Iran and the Challenge of Azerbaijani Identity” Brenda Shaffer with Harvard qualifications, the author of garbage such as “Russia and a Divided Azerbaijan”, “Russian Azerbaijan, 1905 (! H.)-1920” Tadeusz Swietochowski with Monmouth University credentials and followers of the king of “Azeri” fiction fabrication Ziya Bunyatov.

Astonishingly, not a word about the plight of the Armenians under “Azeri” tyranny nor the consideration of their right for self-determination, nor a remark about the genocidal acts all over fake “Azerbaijan” and the resulting 400,000 plus Armenian real refugees whose houses were appropriated by the murderous “Azeri” thugs where they could have housed even one million refugees in case these existed, nor an acknowledgement of the fact that no retaliatory acts in the customary Turkish behavior occurred anywhere on Armenian soil, nor an utterance about the diabolical destruction of the ancient Jugha cemetery in broad daylight has dripped the parsimonious pens of these diffuser of disinformation. As an analogy, just imagine the torrents of “Nazi, Hitler, anti-Semite” condemnations for at least 48 hours on international mass media in case a swastika were to be sprayed on a contemporary Jewish tombstone anywhere on the planet.


#30 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:03 AM

The future of Artsakh and Armenia

The fact of the whole pipeline and railway matter is that the Turks are doing everything to show to the world that they are important and indispensable, while through isolating Armenia they hope to realize their sick pan-Turkist delusion and force it to cede the liberated land to the sore loser and perpetrator of genocide and war, the nonentity that stole its name from the northwest Iranian region of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan). Right until now (early 2008), Armenia has not only managed to survive, but has a double digit, annual economic growth rate for several consecutive years.

Turks cannot tolerate the existence of an Armenia of any size and seeing that it is able to progress without the Turk is a nightmare to these murderous squatters. The future of Armenia is not only related to the future of Artsakh, it depends on it. The liberated territories have strengthened the Achilles’ heel of the republic, the narrowing southern part, the province of Siunik (Zangezur), which was held despite the Turkish machinations to sever it and annex it to fake “Azerbaijan” both in late 1920s and in the 1990s when they were cunningly putting forward the idea that they, the losers, would “exchange” the de facto independent Artsakh, by recognizing it, with Meghri, south of Siunik to eliminate the wedge between the Turkic tribes and finally materialize the goal of their age long delirium.

The great Armenian hero Garegin Njdeh (Nzhdeh) resisted the Turco-Bolshevik deceit in December 1920 and declared the independent republic of Lernahyastan (Mountainous Armenia), perhaps saving human civilization from utter Turkification. This might sound exaggerated but taking a look at history and the pan-Turkist aspirations one can appreciate the existence of this wedge that reins in the Turkish unfathomable craving for territory.

Territory, this is what it’s all about! It’s not oil, it’s not money… It was of no importance that they were killing the people most vital for their economy. According to the Bryce report, The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire 1915-16, “Our geographical survey has shown that talent and temperament had brought most of the industry, commerce, finance and skilled intellectual work of Turkey into the Armenians' hands. The Greeks may still have competed with them on the Ægean fringe, and the Sephardi Jews in the Balkans, but they [Armenians] had the whole interior of the Empire to themselves, with no competition to fear from the agricultural Turks or the pastoral Kurds …for they were the only native element capable of raising the Empire economically, intellectually and morally to a European standard, by which alone its existence could permanently be secured.”

An especially vital document that can be the last nail in the coffin of pan-Turkism is the treaty of Sèvres signed by 17 countries including the internationally recognized delegations of Armenia and the Ottomans, where the signatories agreed on awarding the arbitration of the delineation of the border between Turkey and Armenia to the US president Woodrow Wilson. According to international law, it is the duty of all the signing parties to force Turkey to demilitarize the legally ceded land, (the vilayets of Van, Karin (Erzerum), Baghesh (Bitlis) and Trebizond) and hand over its administration to the Republic of Armenia, the legal owner of those territories.

On 22 of November 1920 Woodrow Wilson signed the text of his decision and put the Great Seal of the United States on it, making it part of US law thus, a permanently valid and binding document. Therefore, in reality Turkey has been illegally occupying territory for almost 88 years (writing in 2008). The regrettable confusion, pessimism and disbelief of the majority of Armenians are due to the misunderstanding of this point. Most believe since Sèvres was not ratified as a result of Soviet occupation in December 1920 - soon after the signing by Wilson of the Arbitral Decision not leaving the sufficient time for its enforcing - therefore, it is not valid. Yet the ratification or not of the Sèvres treaty is not relevant to the Wilson arbitration which had been agreed on by the signatories, validating the decision upon its signing.

The Turkish disinformation has spread the lie that the treaty of Lausanne which was signed in 1923 renders the treaty of Sèvres void. This is absolutely not the case, since, according to international law only those states that signed a certain treaty have the power to annul it later. Only those and all of the 17 states plus the US that were involved with the treaty of Sèvres could do this whereas only 7 states were involved in the signing of Lausanne. Because Armenia had been forced into occupation by the still unrecognized Bolshevik bandits, they were not a part of the latter treaty where there is not a single mention of Armenia and Armenians.

Unlike what most Armenians believe, the Lausanne treaty does not occupy itself with the delineation of Turkish Armenian border, thus, it takes the Sèvres decision for granted. It is more about the other neighbors of Turkey, Greece and Bulgaria, and the subject of eastern Turkish border is not touched. Stronger still, it requires from Turkey to treat its minorities well and obliges it to restore and preserve the monuments of the peoples who live or used to live in Turkey, both points violently disregarded by the inventors of genocide ever since. There’s even the objection of the US who has hitherto refused to sign this treaty mainly because of Turkish occupation of Armenian territory. Ironically, Turkey’s second closest ally after Israel, the US, has not ever recognized Turkey.

Since for decades Armenia did not exist as an independent state, Armenians had to do all they could to get the Armenian Genocide recognized and did not have the legal power, i.e. an independent state, to enforce the Wilsonian Arbitration. However after the independence of the Republic of Armenia from the USSR yoke in 1991, things should have moved on. The Armenian government is bound to raise this issue as soon as possible demanding the redrawing of the Turkish-Armenian border according to the only legal treaty signed by the interested sides and a host of other powers, who have the duty to enforce the decisions of Wilson's arbitration, regardless of genocide recognition and what not. This is simply a legal matter and should not be viewed as compensation for all the murdered Armenians, their stolen livelihood and riches and all the destruction to their civilization and monuments. This phase should start after Turkey's recognition of the Armenian Genocide, whenever that may be.

The same way the leaders of Armenia must, no are condemned, to hold on to the liberated territories that serve as the guarantor for a secure and prosperous Armenia which will be the condition to allow the republic, in case a patriotic government comes to power, to raise the issue of the only valid treaty regarding the delineation of the border between Armenia and Turkey, the agreed arbitration of Woodrow Wilson, awarded to him by the treaty of Sèvres, signed on August 10, 1920, by 17 countries including the internationally recognized Armenian republic of the day and the Ottoman delegation.

That will be the day when pan-Turkism will be dead forever and the long chain of the calamities Armenians had to suffer at the paws of the intruding nomads from Turkistan will be broken for good.


Figure 24

Click on the map for a detailed version.

Wilsonian Armenia

Less than 40% of historic Armenian territories: the Armenian Republic of 1918-1920 plus the four provinces, albeit partly, ceded to Armenia by the Woodrow Wilson arbitration, will guarantee the death of pan-Turkism, access to sea and a safe future for the Armenian nation

From treaty of Sèvres regarding the Turkish Armenian border:

Article 89.
Turkey and Armenia, as well as the other High Contracting Parties agree to submit to the arbitration of the President of the United States of America the question of the frontier to be fixed between Turkey and Armenia in the Vilayets of Erzerum, Trebizond, Van and Bitlis, and to accept his decision thereupon, as well as any stipulations he may prescribe as to access for Armenia to the sea, and as to the demilitarization of any portion of Turkish territory adjacent to the said frontier.

ARTICLE 90.
In the event of the determination of the frontier under Article 89 involving the transfer of the whole or any part of the territory of the said Vilayets to Armenia, Turkey hereby renounces as from the date of such decision (my emphasis, this renders the ratification or not of the treaty irrelevant to the decision of Wilson’s arbitration. H.) all rights and title over the territory so transferred. The provisions of the present Treaty applicable to territory detached from Turkey shall thereupon become applicable to the said territory…

The signatories of the treaty who have the legal duty to force Turkey to cede the Armenian lands they illegally occupy:

The British Empire, France, Italy and Japan, these Powers being described in the present Treaty as the Principal Allied Powers;

Armenia, Belgium, Greece, the Hedjaz, Poland, Portugal, Roumania, the Serb-Croat-Slovene state and Czecho-Slovakia, these Powers constituting, with the Principal Powers mentioned above, the Allied Powers, of the one part; and Turkey, of the other part.

A chaotically assembled failed state founded on two pillars of genocide and denial, with no cultural or scientific baggage, no contribution to human civilization other than death, destruction and genocide, no energy resources and an unaccomplished nation, Turkey does a brilliant job of appearing a modern, secular, democratic, tolerant, multicultural, European country in the eyes of a West too crippled in their arrogance to learn from history. The truth is that Turkey is the total opposite of all the above: it is a backward, deeply bigoted, fascist, intolerant, uncivilized, Ural-Altaic bandit empire where Christian priests are assassinated, Bible publishers are beheaded, minority citizens live in constant fear, even the tools of the Turk to exterminate the Armenians, the Kurds, that were especially migrated into Armenia for this very purpose are treated badly…

The brave Armenian editor working only towards peace and understanding between Turks and minorities living in Turkey, Hrant Dink was ruthlessly shot from behind in bright daylight in front of his workplace on 19th of January 2007. After a whole year the true perpetrators (the deep state, i.e. the Gray Wolf rulers of Turkey) have not been brought to justice and the “law” known as article 301 that sentences whoever dares talk about the Armenian Genocide to three years prison for having insulted Turkishness (talking about an unaccomplished nation…) has not moved a millimeter. This is the true ugly face of this genocidal fake state.

Turkey keeps the borders with Armenia closed which is an act of war, demands Armenia to forget about the Armenian Genocide and “return” its 2% of Turkish occupied territories liberated through sacrifice of the best of the nation to the coward “Azeri” losers. They destroy every Armenian monument in Turkish occupied Armenian lands to erase the evidence of their crimes. They change every Armenian place name and the names of flora and fauna with the terms armeniaca or armenicus in them. As soon as a mass grave from the victims of the Armenian Genocide is found they wipe it clean and present it as a Roman sarcophagus or something of the sort to the European scholars. Turkey spends millions of dollars lobbying in the West and seeks the help of Jewish organizations to force their deniers’ viewpoint about the Armenian Genocide and weaves fables about the “rich and powerful” Armenian lobby which in fact is neither and its sole strength is the truth.

Henry Morgenthau, the US Ambassador in the days of the Armenian Genocide, has correctly observed that Turks “were lacking in what we may call the fundamentals of a civilized community. They had no alphabet and no art of writing; no books, no poets, no art, and no architecture; they built no cities and they established no lasting state. They knew no law except the rule of might, and they had practically no agriculture and no industrial organization. They were simply wild and marauding horsemen, whose one conception of tribal success was to pounce upon people who were more civilized than themselves and plunder them. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries these tribes overran the cradles of modern civilization, which have given Europe its religion and, to a large extent, its civilization”.

Yet despite all these blatant shortcomings to put it mildly, the western lovers of Turkey are totally blind. I liken Turkey to an old and gruesomely hideous prostitute that has somehow stolen the cold heart of the West and manages to sell herself at an exaggerated high price.

To conclude, Turkey has nothing, Turkey is nothing. The moment the tap of hundreds of billions of dollars of “aid” that are shoved down the putrid throat of the Sick Man of Europe is turned off, they will start devouring donkeys, later when there’s no more of that they will munch on cats and dogs and still later when these too are scarce, the turkey will gobble down its own chicks… well, whelps.

*****


#31 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:09 AM

Stealing Iranian Dynasties

Safavids Are Kings of Persia not “Azerbaijan”

Figure 25


Shah Esmail killing Uzbek leader Mohammad Sheibani in a battle near Merv, 1510

Turkish “scholars” have transgressed all limits of decency and their slime of shamelessness flowing in every direction has encroached upon all aspects of historic, cultural, religious and national properties of every ancient and existing civilization known to man, desecrating and distorting them all. Not surprisingly, the Iranian dynasties have been appropriated to justify the illegitimate presence of the Turks in lands both inside Iran, those under Persian rule and beyond.

Whenever the need arises to find an excuse for their illegal usurpation of other peoples’ territory, Sumerians, Assyrians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Arameans, Manni, Mittani, Arrata, Urartu, Hurrians, Hittites, Elamite, Medians, Achaemenids, Parthians, Scythians, Aluanians, Egyptians, Etruscans, Lydians, Thracians, Phrygians, Greeks and what not become Turks as naturally as genetic “research” in Turkey and its phony extension “prove” beyond question that Kurds, Eskimos, Native Americans, Incas, Aztecs, Mayas, Martians, Saturnans, Jupiterians and heaven knows what, are all Turks.

Regarding Iran, apart from pre-Islamic Median, Achaemenid, Arsacid (Parthian) and Sassanid Iranian empires, they also claim those that were formed after the Turkic invasions from the 11th century onward. While the Seljuk, Mongol and Tatar devastators that came after the collapse of the caliphate, may be viewed as foreign rulers and occupiers, there’s no justification in usurping the Safavid, Afshar, Zand and Qajar kings and pretend they were Turkish, still more grotesquely the kings of “Azerbaijan”.

That the Safavids were shahs of Persia is indisputable and this fact has never given rise to the slightest atom of doubt in the minds of historians the world over. Yet the counterfeiters have gone to unknown realms of the irrational to weave the most illogical fables to somehow show that they were the emperors of a mighty “unified Azerbaijan” that existed long before the universe was created and stretched from one side of the Milky Way to the other end of a black hole zillions of light years away.

Iran in the time of Safavids was threatened by two ferocious Turkic dynasties: the Ottomans in the west and the Uzbek Sheibanis in the east. For almost three centuries of their reign the Safavids fought the Ottoman Tyranny and were even allies of Europe against the Turks. They firmly believed that they had the mission to restore the Persian Empire to its former glory, prior to Arab and Turkish invasions.

Shiism was introduced in Iran and forced on the people in the time of Shah Esmail for political purposes because of this animosity and the danger of both Sunni Turkic dynasties in the west and the east, mainly to prevent subversive Ottoman influence especially in already Turkish speaking Azarbaijan (the real).

Figure 26


Portrait of Shah Ismail (Reads: Ismael… Sophy… Rex... Per…)


Figure 27


Copper engraving by Dominicus Custos, from his Atrium heroicum Caesarum pub. 1600-1602

The inscriptions “Ismael… Sophy… Rex... Per…” on the Medieval European portrait of Shah Esmail and “Shach Abas Persarvm Rex (Sciac Appas Persiarvm Rex)” on the engraving done by Dominicus Custos do not leave a place for calling the Safavids kings of “Azerbaijan”. The text under the engraving praises Shah Abbas for his victories over the Ottomans and puts him in the hall of fame of great kings (Atrium of heroic Caesars) of history comparing Shah Abbas to Cyrus the Great of Persia.

In 1502, a very young Esmail defeated the Turkic Ak Koyunlu (white sheep) occupiers of Azarbaijan (the real), chose Tabriz as his capital and was declared King on 11 March 1502.

Shah Esmail (Ismail, Ismael), the founder of the dynasty was of Kurdish origin, practiced a Persian Sufi cult and believed he was a descendant of the kings of the Sassanid Empire (224-651 AD). He had to face Ottoman transgression at Chaldiran (1514) where the Turks occupied northwestern parts of Iran and the Caucasus until they were expelled by Shah Abbas the Great (1587-1629) in 1603.

Shah Abbas changed the capital of Iran from Tabriz to the more centrally situated Isfahan in 1598 and undertook unprecedented construction, turning Isfahan into one of the most magnificent cities in the east. Many of these architectural wonders have survived and are among the most popular tourist attractions in Iran.

The flourishing of Persia in the Safavid era is significant both in the context of rendering Turkish claims void, and from a historic perspective regarding the fervent promotion and advance of Persian culture, art, architecture, literature and music.

***

Here it should be mentioned that all the wars between the Ottomans and Safavids invariably took place on Armenian soil causing indescribable, endless suffering to Armenians who only happened to be under the rule of the two monarchies.

Ottoman historian Peçevi testifies “the army of the sultan set out to Erzerum and Kars via Dyarbekir in 1554. Upon arriving in Eastern Armenia, the conquering army razed all the prosperous villages to the ground. The frenzied victorious army annihilated cities and villages, houses and buildings to such degree that it horrified anybody who saw that. The Ottoman army enslaved young good looking boys, pretty girls and young women. There were no military tents without less than three of these boys and girls and the number of those tents where they took five or ten of them was countless”.

The pillages of the people whose land had become the battlefield of others went on the whole time. The kapikullari (Ottoman gendarmes = bandits) became the “rulers” of the land and mistreated the Armenians in every possible way they chose. Akdag, another Turkish historian writes, “According to the order issued by Yussuf Agha, his six Sipahi regiments had massacred the entire population of Ahiska around 1603”.

The forced deportation/immigration of Armenians in 1604 into Iran by Shah Abbas who, in order to cut the supplies, employed the policy of scorched lands in his war with the Ottomans, is yet another tragedy in the never ending chain of Armenian suffering.

However, unlike their genocidal subjugation under the Turks, the humane treatment of the Armenians in Iran and the fact they were allowed to build their own quarter near Isfahan that they called Nor Jugha (New Julfa) in memory of the original Jugha in Nakhijevan has healed the wounds and ever since their settlement, Armenians have become active participants in cultural, educational, industrial, political, economical, military, etc., matters, never sparing an effort in the advancement of their beloved Iran. In fact the migration of the Armenians served the double purpose of an impetus for the economic progress in the time of the Safavids: the entire import/export enterprise from Europe to India and China being entrusted to the industrious Armenian merchants.

Generally speaking, the Safavids and the successive dynasties were tolerant to friendly towards Armenians and not only those inside Iran. In eastern parts of Armenia that were under Iranian rule, they needed the Armenian sympathy for their empire, thus, for instance, according to the great Armenian historic novelist Raffi (1835-1888), Shah Abbass recognized the Armenian Meliks (Arabic for king(s)) of Karabakh (Artsakh), Nader Shah acknowledged the Melikdoms’ autonomy and Agha Mohammad Khan promised them greater authority.


#32 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:11 AM

Nader Shah Is the Savior and King of Persia not “Azerbaijan”

Figure 28


Nader Shah (1688-1747)

The Safavid Shah Sultan Hussein (1694-1722) plunged the country into chaos because of his incompetence. The people gave him the nickname of mullah because of his religious zeal. Shiite excesses were introduced and non-Muslims were persecuted. This weakened the mighty Safavid Empire to the extent that in 1719 Mahmood (Mahmoud, Mahmud) Afghan, the Safavid vassal of Afghanistan revolted and invaded Isfahan, killed Shah Sultan Hussein in 1722, pillaged and ransacked the land which also affected the Armenians of New Jugha.

Vulnerable, the country was attacked from all sides: the Ottomans invaded from the west, Russians from the north while central Iran was being plundered by the Afghans. In such desperate circumstances, a true savior emerged from the northwestern region of Iran. Nader khan of Turkmen (Turcoman) origin and son of a peasant came to the rescue of his homeland Iran and miraculously liberated the country, repelling the multiple enemies and forcing them out of Iran. It’s worth mentioning that the Armenian Meliks (kings) of Karabakh (Artsakh) helped Nader in ridding Iran of the Ottomans once and for all, for which service they received Nader’s praise who reaffirmed their autonomy and recognized their rule of Artsakh.

By 1735 the country was free of enemy occupation and Nader declared himself king in 1736. He started to expand his empire and invaded Kandahar, Kabul, the Mughal Empire of India and massacred a large number of people for which he is cursed to this day by Indians. Despite his despotic behavior, he was a religiously tolerant person and tried unsuccessfully to reconcile the Shiites and Sunnis. His actions caused his own generals to plot against him and they killed him in his sleep in 1747.

Nader Shah Afshar rescued his country from the verge of perishing and if it were not for him, Iran would not have existed today. Calling him king of “Azerbaijan” is totally nonsensical given the fact he fought the Ottomans vehemently and made maintaining the territorial integrity of Persia the work of his life.


#33 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:13 AM

Qajars Are Kings of Persia not “Azerbaijan”

Like in the case of the Safavids, and indeed when required in case of any ruling dynasty, Iranian or otherwise, the Qajar kings (1794–1925) are also hijacked as kings of “Azerbaijan”. The fact that the Qajars were a Turkmen tribe has given the impostors an adequate pretext to confuse the occasional non-Iranian individuals even more efficiently.

Agha Mohammad Khan, the founder of the dynasty and a ruthless man, set out with the same goal as Nader Shah, that is, to unify Iran and restore it to its glory after the chaotic period following the fall of the short lived Zand dynasty. He chose Tehran, then a mere village, as his capital, was crowned in 1796 and was murdered in 1797.

The Qajars are the least favored kings of Iran. The main reason, beside the abject condition of the country in the time of their rule or their concessions to foreigners, especially the British and the Russians, lies in Agha Mohammad Khan’s successor, his nephew Fathali Shah’s (1797–1834) defeat from the Russians and the humiliating treaties of Golestan (1813) and Turkmenchai (1828) which forced Iran to cede the lands to the north of the Arax (Araxes) River.

Nasseruddin Shah (1848-1896) is considered the smartest Qajar king in whose time western sciences and ideas were advanced in Iran. Especially his prime minister, Amir Kabir, is a bright star in Iranian history due to his reforms in all directions from boosting the economy to diminishing foreign influence, from promoting education to relieving the artificially ornate written language from its excesses which initiated the modern Persian prose. Rousing the jealousy of certain treacherous courtiers, he was rewarded for his services by the Shah by being murdered while bathing.

The Constitutional Revolution (1906-1911), a first in the so-called Middle-East, took place in the time of the Qajars. The Armenians played an important role with Yeprem Khan Davitian as the most successful military figure of the movement.

Whichever way one looks at it, the Qajars can in no way whatsoever be seen as kings of “Azerbaijan”. They are not the most favorite dynasty in the millennia-old Iranian history but they are unquestionably an integral part of it.

Here I would like to add that the Armenians had a difficult time under Muslim khans of the Caucasus, the vassals of the Persian kings who had the freedom to do as they pleased with the indigenous Christian population. For instance, Yerevan fortress, the most important and secure part of the city, housed the khan and his entourage. It was a city within Yerevan where the Armenians could have their businesses but had to leave before nightfall. In any case, the landlord of a city founded in 782 BC by the Armenian king Argishti I centuries before the rise of the Persian Empire by Cyrus the Great, was a second class citizen in their own home.

The persecutions of the Muslim khans rekindled the hope of liberation from their yoke in the minds of some, but not all, Armenians who fought in the Russian camp. Luigi Villari believes “…the very generals commanding the Russian invading armies were often Armenians, such as Lazareff and Loris Melikoff. It is indeed safe to say that but for the Armenians, Russia would never have conquered the Caucasus”. But the Iranian Armenian historic novelist Raffi remarks to his own regret that it was a decision which not only did not bring independence to Armenia, it caused the dissolution of the centuries old five Melikdoms of Artsakh (Moluk Khamsa of Karabakh) by the Russians who turned Armenia and Georgia into Russian provinces.

Unfortunately for the Armenians, many Iranians regret the loss of the so-called South Caucasus to this very day, a subject that comes up every time there is talk of relations with the Russians. It’s interesting that the loss of Afghanistan, an integral part of Iran until the 18th century AD, where ethnic, linguistic, religious and cultural ties are much closer, which happened only a century prior to the Russian victory is not remembered and mourned at all! The inability of many Iranians to see that Armenia is an ancient nation with a unique culture is detrimental not only to the Armenians, but the Iranians themselves. As mentioned elsewhere, the Armenian minority in Iran has not spared any effort to bring its share to the progress of Iran, culturally, politically, economically, scientifically, technically, etc.

The Armenians do not have any territorial claims on Iran, the majority, no matter from where, have an affinity with Iran and always support it. The fact that the lands ceded to Russians are no longer part of Russia but exist as independent states, confirms their non-belonging to one or the other. If the 1,648,195 km² vast, oil and gas rich Iran lets the almost two hundred years old grievance with the Russians go, the more or less 40,000 km² Armenia (including Artsakh) can still be a more important guarantee to harness wolfish pan-Turkist appetites of the Turks for the real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan), the main reason for calling the tail of Turkey with the same name. This said, the relations between Iran and Armenia can be described as cordial at present (2007) and the “complaint” is aimed more at the mentality of the intellectual class of Iranians with the Golestan/Turkmenchai complex.


#34 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:19 AM

Stealing Iranian Cultural Icons

Any Iranian (or other) cultural, political, intellectual, scientific, etc. figure can be shamelessly turkified anytime the need arises. Recently (2007), at a commemoration ceremony for the great Iranian poet Molana Jalaleddin Molavi Balkhi known as Rumi in the West, the current Ottoman sultan Erdogan, howling the praise of someone whose ideas are incomprehensible for the Turk let alone his Persian verses, whimpered that Molavi was born in Afghanistan, a country that did not exist before the 18th century AD with current boundaries defined in the 19th century, and degraded him calling him a Turkish mystic. It goes without saying that the terms “Iran” or “Iranian” were not uttered by the liar.

Molavi was born in 1207 AD in Balkh (Bactria), a thriving city in the Iranian Khorasan province of the day, now near Mazar e Sharif in Afghanistan. Later he emigrated to Iconia (turkified into Konya), the Seljuk occupied Byzantium of the time, hence Rumi = of Rum (Rome).

Exploring Molavi’s world will take an entire lifetime, let us content ourselves with the knowledge that many references to Turks can be found throughout his poetry. Not a single case of praise or admiration! On the contrary, his Turks are either gullible boasters in stupid situations or downright condescended. The stories of his poems usually have a deeper, allegorical meaning which is out of the scope of our subject, yet the use of Turks as savages and idiots tells us about Molavi’s view of these arrogant pretenders who have shamelessly attributed him to their unworthy lot.

A short poem (Masnavi 2.93) called “The intention of the Oghuz to kill a man to scare another” tells the story of “those blood shedding Oghuz Turks” who attacked a village to plunder, found two rich men of the town, swiftly tied the arms of one of them to slaughter him. He asked them why and they told him they wanted to scare the other to show them the hiding place of their gold…

In another one (Masnavi 5.133), he tells the story of Satan presented as a Turk’s dog sitting at the door of the tent. The dog barks and attacks the strangers who pass by, like a lion, yet inside the kids pull his tail and humiliate it. In the poem the inability and clumsiness of the Turk to tame and silence his dog is shown in true satiric fashion.

One could imagine a bunch of suit and tie idlers sitting in a large hall whimpering about someone they haven’t the least comprehension, each appropriating him to their tribe or ethnicity, unable to read a single verse of Molavi, let alone understand it. It would be amusing to see the foolish look in their faces when this poem would be recited to them in their own language. I would love to see the stupor, then sudden stopping and falling of those rotating dervishes who have stolen Molana not knowing a damn thing about the guy.

The picture is the same for the “Azeri” sort. Here two important Persian personalities are presented as examples. Needless to say it is just a sample of the pile of rubbish Turkish “historians” put out continuously. If they can turkify Mesrop Mashtots, the inventor of the Armenian alphabet, the treasure of a people Turks have furiously continued to destroy, doing the same thing to Iranian icons should cause them no pangs of conscience.

Before pulverizing “Azeri” delirium around Nezami, let us quote a couple of verses from another great Iranian poet, Khaghani (1121-1190, Xagani according to their transliteration) equally claimed by these Tatars as being an “Azeri” Turk 800 years before the concoction of fake “Azerbaijan”:

Do not become the bosom pal of a stranger
Do not eat or drink from aliens’ abode

Do not eat of Turk’s food and at the table
Eat politely and not in the Turkish mode


#35 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:23 AM

Nezami Is an Iranian Poet

Figure 29


Statue of Nezami in Tabriz, Iran

What can an artificially concocted “nation” do to legitimize its illegal presence in other people’s land? Relying on anachronistic, fallacious accounts of a nonexistent history, the “Azeris” are shamelessly attempting to fool the unsuspecting and the curious so that they form a false idea of a two sided feud between peoples of a region with equal rights and cultural background regarding certain disputed territories.

An unimaginably comical example is the posthumous - with almost nine hundred years of distance - appropriation of the great Iranian epic poet Jamaleddin Abu Mohammad Elias Nezami Ganjavi (c. 1141-1209, Nizami Gencevi according to Turkish transliteration). The poor guy would turn in his grave if he could hear that he metamorphosed into a fabricated ethnicity, about nine centuries after his own time. Nezami Ganjavi (of Ganja/Gandzak, in Armenia, formerly part of Persian Empire, under present day “Azeri” occupation), wrote his poems, how could it be otherwise, in Persian. He is regarded as one of major Iranian poets, along with the greatest Persian epic poet Ferdowsi.

None of the main subjects of Nezami’s stories deals with the Turks. His masterpiece is the collection of five epics, the Khamseh (Khamsa) of Nezami four of which have Iranian and Arabic fables as subject matter and the last one Eskandarnameh is about Alexander. Since the historic knowledge we have wasn’t available at Nezami’s time, it should be noted that his Alexander is the successor of the mythical Iranian kings of Kian.

Nezami has also written patriotic poems revealing his devotion of his worshipped Iran. His condescending remarks about the Turks clearly prove that in no possible way could he have anything to do with those primitive invaders who had ravaged his homeland in those days.

Praising his homeland Iran Nezami says:

The whole world is merely body and Iran its heart
He who’s saying this, is not abashed even in part

For Iran is the soul of the whole earth
And soul is higher than what body’s worth

In the introduction to Leili o Majnoon ordered to him by Akhtasan ibn Manoochehr shah of Shirvan, alluding to the injustice the Turkish sultan Mahmood did to Ferdowsi, the breach of his contract to pay him with gold coins, he writes from Shirvanshah’s viewpoint:

Turkishness is not the quality of our pledge
Turkish manner does not become our language

A propos, Mahmood Ghaznavi (Qaznavi) put an end to the Samanians, the first Iranian dynasty after Arab rule. Ferdowsi, destitute as a result of his dedication to writing the Shahnameh, had no recourse but to turn to Mahmood for support. At first he encouraged Ferdowsi having in mind stirring up the Iranian people against his rivals, the Turkish A’al Afrasiab family who were his allies against the Samanians. After a while Mahmood defeated his adversary and when Ferdowsi came to him, he disdainfully paid one dirham, instead of a gold coin, per verse for the 60,000 verse long Shahnameh, perhaps the greatest epic of all time. Disappointed, Ferdowsi spent Mahmood’s reward on going to a bath and a beer afterwards. To escape Mahmood’s anger he fled to Herat, later to Tabaristan and wrote a parody for Mahmood. Shahryar, the Iranian ruler of Tabaristan paid him 100,000 dirham to persuade him not to publish the parody.

Legend has it during a raid on India Mahmood remembered the great poet and regretted his mistreatment, sent 60,000 Dinars in gold with pomp at his door at the exact moment they were taking Ferdowsi’s body out… His daughter refused the gift and spent it on charity.

It did not end there. The reactionary mullah Sheikh Abulqassim Gorgani forbade him to be buried in a Muslim cemetery and refused to pray for his soul, because the master of epic had “wasted” his life on relating the deeds and lives of pre-Islamic legendary kings and heroes.

Back to Nezami, in Sharafnameh (a part of Eskandarnameh) describing a battle between Alexander and the Russians and his employing of the defeated Turks against the enemy, he praises the use of one enemy, i.e. the Turks to get rid of another; or in his words the Turkish “poison” to counter the Russian “poison”.

Proud of his Persian (Dari) poetry he boasts:

So much light I have brought in the eyes
That narrow eyes of the Turk have widened in size

Or still:

Since the fire of commending kindled in me
I have but spoken the jewel of Dari

In a poem from Sharafnameh, Nezami’s Alexander is ready to fight the Mongol Khaghan (Khan):

He opened his mouth and the Turks he cursed
For without sedition was never born a Turk

His patriotism and praise of ancient Iranian customs have directed criticism from his contemporaries who have questioned his Islamic faith.

A truly funny document, written in bad German is at my disposal. The unfortunate thing is it is available as a PDF file on the website of Potsdam University. To provide some refreshing moments I translate some passages:

By: “NOURIDA ATESHI”
Title: “Nizami Gencevi is our Spiritual-Moralistic Legitimation.” (Talking about illegitimacy; they damn well know it! H.)

“We have chosen Nizami Gencevi as the patron (namesake) of our cultural institute because he was one of the first realistic poets of the Middle Ages and Azerbaijan.” While it is absurd to call Nezami an “Azerbaijani” eight centuries before the region was fraudulently named “Azerbaijan”, the nonsensical justification of naming their sham institute, and the irrelevant deduction, “because he was one of the first realistic poets” is as surrealistic as it can get. Plus, the use of the term realistic to describe Nezami’s poetry reminds us of the superficial Soviet evaluation of cultural icons of all epochs and nations, where sticking awkward labels on anyone was obligatory to make them acceptable for their red tyranny.

After a poorly written brief presentation of Nezami, she goes on: “The great Azerbaijani poets and thinkers are mentioned in classical German literature; however, they have been placed in the wrong countries, also Nizami who spent his whole life in his birthplace Gence (Gandzak/Ganja H.). Despite this fact, he was immortalized in Goethe’s “West-Östlicher Divan” as a Persian poet.” No comment!

“In a chapter of the book “Älterer Perser”, the Azerbaijani religious philosopher Zarathustra also receives Persian nationality”. This silly remark breaks the record of the brazenness of Turkish history invention. Besides the fact that Zoroaster (Zarathustra) is considered an Iranian prophet, not a mere philosopher, even the real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) was not called as such in the times of Zoroaster which although not definitely known, predate the times of Alexander by centuries. Moreover, the birthplace of Zoroaster is disputed: some believe he was born in Media Minor (later Atrpatakan/real Azarbaijan) because of the presence of the important Azargoshnasp temple; others situate his origins in Khorasan, northeast of Iran. Even in India his followers are known as Parsi (= of Pars, Persia i.e. Persian) and not “Azeri”. Stealing the crown of inanity, this doesn’t even call for a treatment in a separate Zoroaster topic.

Of course, all this fictitious self-praise wouldn’t serve any purpose if it weren’t to smear one of the real ancient nations of the region on whose homeland they have faked their bogus “Azerbaijan”: the Armenians. She breaks more stinking winds: “In Georgia, a monument was desecrated by the Armenians – the monument of Nizami Gencevi. Why? Some Armenians apparently think that because they cannot have Gencevi, others mustn’t have him either”. The desecrators supreme, who have annihilated every surviving ancient Armenian monument in “Azeri” occupied Armenian territories, accuse the Armenians of the barbarities they are the masters of… With their rich millennia old civilization, the Armenians don’t need to steal other peoples’ poets, prophets, scientists, philosophers, heroes, royal dynasties, territory, history, place names, etc., to justify their existence, unlike the cattle-herder, tent-dwelling nomads of less than a century ago, the Tatars of the Caucasus turned “Azeri”.

The icing on the cake or more accurately the fly on the pile of Turk-dung put out by this illiterate scholar is yet to come: “many people want to adorn themselves with Gencevi. Also Kurds and especially Persians, because he wrote his writings in the Persian language. A glance into Gencevi’s time shows what was happening in the 12th century A.D. The concept “Azerbaijan” or “Azerbaijani poet” did not exist back then (my emphasis H.). There was only the idea of Xorasan (Khorasan, northeast region of Iran H.) Literature.” Either the “scholar” must have gone totally bonkers in her rage weaving cock-and-turk stories, that on one hand she admits: “The concept “Azerbaijan” …did not exist back then” or on the other hand she is completely unaware of the actual existence of the real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) where a dialect of Pahlavi Persian was spoken long before and several centuries after Turks set hoof west of the Caspian.

Further on she presents her “proofs” of Nezami’s Turkishness, an example of which will suffice: “Nizami always felt that he was a Turk.” How do you know? “…in one of his works …“Sultan Sencer (Senjer/Sanjar H.) and the Old Woman” an old woman complains about sultan Sencer’s tyrannical behavior. She tells him that the Turkish government has made progress and has enriched the world with justice and righteousness. If the sultan is so cruel and violent, then he couldn’t be a Turk. Could a Persian poet characterize the Turks in such a manner? Has a Persian spiritual ever written or spoken in such a positive fashion regarding the Turks?” doubts the Turkish literary expert, well aware of the savageries of her kind. “Never and no one!” adds the lying Turk.

Advocates of Turkey’s invasion of EU beware! If it took nine centuries and genocide to totally turkify Armenia and Asia Minor, given the false “multiethnic” policies in the West, the diminishing interest in traditional family structures, hence population decrease in ethnicities of European origin, high number of present day Turks and the possibility for the male to have up to four wives, in less than two centuries after this intrusion, Europe will be completely turkified. Nevertheless, they should keep in mind that in the surfacing of any utterance (true or fabricated) by Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, Rembrandt, Da Vinci, Michelangelo or Shakespeare in the line of “Turks aren’t such a bad bunch after all” will be interpreted as irrefutable proof of their being Turkish the moment they set their paws in the EU.
A mishmash of “historical” accounts, literary movements of the time in Iran and other subjects no business of the Turks follows where the ignorant sage dares compare Ferdowsi (Firdovsi in her gibberish) to Nezami and conclude that the former was a bigoted Persian nationalist whereas the latter was a tolerant Turkish internationalist. Here again the Soviet symptoms remind us of their ugly presence. It’s interesting that whenever the occasion calls for it, Ferdowsi is plagiarized and portrayed as a Turk. Perhaps the greatest Iranian after the Arab invasion, who is responsible for reviving the Iranian identity and Persian language which was supplanted by Arabic in written language, is cunningly misrepresented by the imposter to further her sophistical argument of lo, behold: Tolerance!

The truth is, Nezami prided himself of being the follower of Ferdowsi, thus, such an ugly analogy cannot diminish the greatness of any of the two but magnifies the illiteracy of a representative of the most intolerant hordes of genocidal savages that have exterminated all the highly civilized Christian indigenous nations living in the lands occupied and devastated by her sort, that most probably cannot even read Nezami’s poetry, and she goes on with her desperate history falsification, accusing the Iranians, Russians, Armenians and Arabs of the same: “The falsified history will be rewritten anew (my emphasis H.) and will not let itself be taken from its firm ground in Azerbaijan”, confesses the forger and with this glorious delirium she ends her “essay”.


#36 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:25 AM

Babak Khorramdin Is an Iranian Hero

Babak Khorramdin has been presented in the “Islamic Historians” section under Massoudi; therefore, a short reminder must be adequate:

The Iranian hero, native of real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan), Babak Khorramdin started the Khorramdin movement in 820s AD, against the caliphate, who had taken over the rule of Persia after the Arab invasion which imposed the religion of Islam on Iranians. Babak’s aim was to restore the ancient Iranian religion and to free Iran from the Arab rule. This movement lasted almost two decades and dealt serious blows to the Arabs until Babak’s tragic mutilation.

The fact of Babak’s origins being from real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) has been twisted to suit “Azeri” historical contrivances to deceive both the real Azarbaijani Iranians and turn them against their people and the rest of the world to pretend that their counterfeit “nation” could also produce men of valor and integrity. Babak has been reconstructed as the greatest “Azeri” hero who fought the occupying Persians to liberate “Turkish” Azarbaijanis from the Iranian yoke two full centuries before the first Turkic invasions!

One must have a colorful imagination to believe that the Iranians in real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) or elsewhere in Iran had ever heard of the Turks in those days, but time and space are irrelevant to Turkish history forgers.

*****



#37 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:27 AM

Historians about Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Aluania

Greek and Roman Historians of Antiquity

Historic documents dealing with Aghvank (Aluania, Albania of the Caucasus) recorded by European historians from the first century BC to the third century AD, given Aghvank’s geographic situation, are obviously not the most exhausting of all. Nevertheless, since the mysterious peoples of the region have long disappeared from the world scene, these records are worthy of consideration.

Aristobolus, who participated in Alexander’s excursions, has recorded the existence of the Aghvans (Aluanians) in the 80s of the third century BC.

Although the peoples collectively called the Aghvans (Aluanians) appear in the fourth century BC in history, the earliest accounts of the tribes living in the region known as Aluania (Aghvank) come from the sixth and fifth centuries BC. Hecate (Hecataeus of Miletos) has noted the existence of a people called the Miks who lived near the Arax. Herodotus calls them Mycians and also mentions other ethnicities such as the Caspians and Utians. Strabo, who lived around 65-63 BC and 21-23 AD in Amasya in Asia Minor, speaks of 26 tribes who lived in Aghvank.

The authors of antiquity report that the state of Aghvank was founded in the first century BC.

Pompey’s invasion of the East brought the Romans to the shores of the Caspian and according to Strabo, Theophanes also went on the expedition. Later, in 34 AD, Marc Anthony reached Aghvank as well.

The historians of this era describe Aluania (Aghvank) a land limited to Armenia in the south (River Kur), Sarmatia in the north (Caucasus mountains), Iberia (Georgia, Olazanes River) in the northwest and the Caspian in the east; a land far smaller than the present day artificial state of counterfeit “Azerbaijan”, whose fabricated “history” cites half of the universe being inside the borders of “Albania”, to whose people and civilization the Tatars of the Caucasus turned “Azeri” have no relation or affinity whatsoever. As with the Islamic historians of a later epoch, the Greek and Roman authors consider the River Kur the border between Armenia and Aghvank.


#38 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:29 AM

Herodotus (Hρόδοτος c. 484-425 BC)

To prove their absurd claim that the present day Azarbaijan (the real) and “Azerbaijan” (the fake) were one country trillions of quadrillions of millions of eons ago, besides pretending to be the descendants of Aghvans (they prefer the term “Albanians”) who had nothing whatsoever to do with the Turks, the “Azeris” also claim that the Medes, a people of Iranian origin and unrelated to Aghvans, were also Turks and that the Persians who defeated them, in fact broke up their unity. That the Medes are Aryan (Iranian) is obvious from all the names pertaining to Median Iran as the name Atrpatakan itself. Let’s hear it from ancient historians.

Herodotus says: “The Medes had exactly the same equipment as the Persians; and indeed the dress common to both is not so much Persian as Median. They had for commander Tigranes, of the race of the Achaemenids. These Medes were called anciently by all people Arians; but when Media, the Colchian, came to them from Athens, they changed their name. Such is the account which they themselves give.” (Translated by George Rawlinson) ●


Patrocles (3rd century BC)

Patrocles, an officer who around 283-282 BC was commissioned by Seleucus I (312-281 BC) and Antiochus I (281-261 BC) to undertake a reconnaissance expedition around the Caspian to realize the unfinished plans of Alexander, prepared an exhaustive report which is known to have been one of the most valuable sources about Aghvank (Aluania, Aran, Albania of the Caucasus). This work has not been recovered; however, quoting Eratosthenes, Strabo and Pliny have given accounts of Patrocles’ expedition and Strabo has used Patrocles’ report to inform about the Caspian Sea. It is believed that Patrocles knew about the Aghvans and the geographic situation of their land. ●


Eratosthenes (Eρατοσθένης 276-194 BC)

Strabo considers Eratosthenes and Theophanes more trustworthy and has discarded other authors such as Poseidonius. Strabo and Pliny have used Eratosthenes work in their accounts of the Caspian and the peoples living in the region. ●


Polibi (Πολύβιος Around 205 BC)

From the little that remains from Polibi’s Historiae, we learn about the Kadus (Talish) who lived around the western shores of the Caspian in the area between Aluania (Aghvank) and Aturpatekan (Azarbaijan the real) which confirms that the two were distinct since the earliest times Lesser Media had been called Atrpatakan. ●


Strabo (Στράβων 65/63 BC-23 AD)

Strabo has visited Armenia in the first century BC and has recorded his observations about the region including the Aghvank and the Aghvans. He has considered the work of Theophanes’ and third century BC authors such as Eratosthenes and Patrocles (who under Seleucus I and Antiochus I had organized expeditions around the Caspian), more trustworthy and has used them as reference.

In the eleventh chapter of his Geography, Strabo states: “Albania (Aghvank H.) is a land stretching from the south of the Caucasus Mountains to the River Kur and from the Caspian to the Olazanes River.” He also situates the “Atropatenean Media” to the south of Aghvank, thus confirming that the two were separate entities.

Describing the River Kur, he remarks: “The River Kur has its source in Armenia and flows into the plain between the Caucasus Mountains and joins the River Aragos (Aragvi) and other rivers that flow down these mountains and crosses Albania (Aghvank). This abundant river separates Albania (Aghvank) and Armenia… and pours into the Caspian.”

“The plains of Araxena and Sakasena that border Albania (Aghvank) through the River Kur, belong to Armenia… The River Kur is situated between Albania (Aghvank) and Armenia” Strabo confirms.


Pliny (23–79 AD)

Pliny has used Eratosthenes’ works for his accounts of the Caspian region and the lands surrounding it. In his Natural Geography, Pliny observes: “The Albanians (Aghvans H.) inhabited the vicinity of the River Kur and the Olazanes River (Alazan) separated them from the Iberians (Georgians H.)” He presents Kabalak (Կապաղակ) as the most important city of Aghvank. ●


Plutarch (Πλούταρχος Around 46-120 AD)

Plutarch’s Lives contains material dealing with Aghvank such as military aid to Tigran the Great of Armenia by Aghvan tribes. Describing Pompey’s invasion of Aghvank, their permission to allow the Romans to cross Aghvank and the subsequent, sudden Aghvan rebellion against the Romans, he mentions place names and as it appears from his writings, the rivers Arax and Kur did not meet and Arax flowed into the Caspian without mixing with River Kur. This confirms that Armenia’s easternmost border stretched to the Caspian.

Marc Anthony’s one hundred thousand strong army faced fierce resistance from Phraates (Farhad) IV, (c. 37-3 BC) in Atrpatakan and according to Plutarch after suffering heavy casualties (20,000 infantry and 40,000 cavalry) the Romans crossed the Arax River into Armenia.

This confirms that first: the Arax River was (and still is) the border between Atrpatakan (Azarbaijan the real) and Armenia and second: there was no “Azerbaijan” north of the Arax River and third: the two regions north and south of the Arax River were distinct, unrelated and never two parts of a single “Azerbaijan”. ●


Dionysus (2nd century AD)

The second century AD historian and geographer Dionysus has written about the Aghvans (Aluanians). He notes peoples from northwest to southeast of the Caspian Sea as follows: Saka (Scythians), Uns (according to some these were same as Huns others identify them with Udins), Caspians, Kadus (Talish), Aghvans (Aluanians), Mardes, Hirkanians, Tapirs but no races related to the Turks. ●


Cornelius Tacitus (c. 56–c. 117 AD)

Tacitus has written about the Aghvans, the Parthians and invasions of nomadic tribes into Aghvank. He relates the Roman invasion into Armenia in 58 AD when they turned Artashat into rubble and reduced it to cinders. It’s interesting to note that the Mardes (one of several peoples of Aghvank) ambushed the Romans several times but were defeated by the Romans who used the help of the Iberians (Georgians). In 60 AD, the Armenian king Trdat I (Tiridates), tried with no success to attack the Romans from Atrpatakan, therefore he went to Rome for peace talks to avoid the dangers coming from the northern tribes in the Caucasus, who also threatened the Roman interests. ●


Ptolemy (Πτολεμαῖος c 83–161 AD)

In his description of Armenia, Ptolemy writes in his Geography: “The greater Armenia borders Colchida, Iberia (Georgia) and Albania (Aghvank) along the River Kur”. Elsewhere he adds: “Albania (Aghvank) shares its border in the south with Armenia and Iberia… The cities and villages of Albania (Aghvank) are situated between Iberia and a river that flows from the Caucasus Mountains and joins the River Kur. This river stretches all along Iberia and Albania (Aghvank) and separates them from Armenia”.


Arrian (c. 86/92-c. 175 AD)

In his work Anabasis Alexandri, Arrian describes the battle of Gaugamela in 330 BC, where Aluanian (Aghvan) soldiers participated among the army of Darius III. He also notes that in the multinational Achaemenid army that included the Medes, Bactrians, Parthians, Aluanians (Aghvans), etc., Athropat (Atrpat, Atropat) was the commander of the Medes where the Saka, Kadus and Aghvans were also fighting under his command. He mentions Aluania (Aghvank) and Media Atropatena (Atrpatakan) as separate entities. ●


Dio Cassius (Around 165-235 AD)

In his Roman History, among the events of the years 68 to 47 BC, Dio Cassius narrates Pompey’s invasion of Albania (Aghvank) in detail. He says: “He (Pompey) spent the winter in Anaitida by the River Kurna (Kur) and divided his army in three parts… He couldn’t get through the winter without trouble because Oroyz the king of Albania (Aghvank) who lived to the north of the River Kurna (Kur) fought with him.” He also reports the existence of an Anahid temple near the River Kur which shows that religious beliefs of Armenians were also present in the area. ●


#39 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:33 AM

Additional note:

In the Sassanid king Khossrow (Khosro, Khusrau) I Anushirvan’s time (531-579 AD) the Iranian Empire was divided into four administrative regions (koosts).

Figure 30


Kartir Inscription, Naqsh e Rajab, Iran

In his inscription, Kartir, the Zoroastrian high-priest living in the third century and contemporary of three Sassanid kings, speaks of the spreading of the Fire of Mughan (=magi of Zoroastrianism) and distinguishes interior lands of the Iranian empire from Aniran (lands outside Iran) where Aghvank also is a part of, confirming the fact that it was not a part of an imaginary “Azerbaijan”.

“…And I made prosperous many fires and magi in the empire of Iran. And I also, by command of the King of Kings, put in order those magi and fires which were for the territory outside Iran, wherever the horses and men of the King of Kings arrived -- the city of Antioch and the country of Syria (12) and what is beyond Syria, the city of Tarsus and the country of Cilicia and what is beyond Cilicia, the city of Caesarea and from the country of Cappadocia to Galatia, and the country of Armenia and Georgia, and Albania (Aghvank H.), and from Balaskan to the Alans' pass. And Shahpur, King of Kings, with his own horses and men visited with pillaging, firing, and havoc. (13) But I did not allow damage and pillaging, and whatsoever pillaging had been made by any person, those things I had taken away and returned to their own country.”


#40 Hellektor

Hellektor

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Location:Iran

Posted 23 April 2008 - 11:35 AM

Islamic Historians

The histories of what’s come to be known as South Caucasus, Armenia and Iran have been closely interrelated since the earliest periods of recorded history. The Iranian Median Empire posed serious threats to the Armenian kingdom of Van. According to Movses Khorenatsi, the Armenian king Tigran Yervandian (Orontid, ruled around 560–535 BC) helped Cyrus II (the Great) in overthrowing the Median king Astyages (Ajdahak) and establishing the Achaemenids. Of course, later on Cyrus annexed Armenia to his empire. Darius the Great (522-486 BC) also attacked Armenia and as stated by his trilingual inscription in Baghastana (Bistoon, Behistun), near Kermanshah, where he calls Armenia: Armina in Old Persian, Harmina in Elamite and Urashtu (Urartu) in Akkadian, he admits he had to fight five times to suppress the rebellious Armenians to subjugate them.

Figure 31


Darius’ inscription Baghastana (Bistoon, Behistun)

The history of Armenia remained related to Iran after the Arab invasion as well. The Arab conquest which also included both countries meant that the Islamic historians couldn’t overlook the events in Armenia. A considerable number of these are Iranian in origin but since for the first couple of centuries of the Islamic era, Arabic was imposed as the written language in the already Islamized Iran, the Iranian scientists, philosophers, travelers, geographers, historians, etc., have written in Arabic.

Aghvank and Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) have always been referred to as separate entities by all Islamic historians. It’s true that at times, they have been put under the same administrative region but even then they were still considered two different lands. The same thing has also happened to Armenia, where sometimes a part of it has come under the administration of Aghvank and vice versa.

In any case, the interesting thing about the accounts of the Islamic historians is that almost all of them consider Aghvank (Aran or Ar Ran in Arabic) a part of Armenia, a point that they report as a most normal and ordinary truth, regardless whether, for instance, Artsakh was put under the administration of Aghvank or otherwise.

This is not good for the “Azeris” who claim to be the descendants of the Aghvans (among all other nations of the region and beyond), who they always refer to with the fallacious terms “Albanians” for the people and “Albania” for their country, the mistaken transliterations of some European historians. “Azeri” distorians who deny the existence of Armenia simply project their deficiencies on Armenians because examining every surviving historical document one will be wasting their time looking for a single mention of “Azeri” as a nation or “Azerbaijan” in the Caucasus whereas all historians who have written about the region, have reported extensively concerning Armenia and Armenians.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users