And the Fraud Had a Name

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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

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

http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/f23-london-gospel-armenia-1634-.gif

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.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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

http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/f24-Wilsonian-Armenia-Map.gif

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.

*****

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

Stealing Iranian Dynasties

Safavids Are Kings of Persia not “Azerbaijan”

Figure 25
http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/f25-shah-esmail-uzbek.jpg

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
http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/f26-shah-ismail-I.jpg

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

Figure 27
http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/f27-shah-abbas-engraving-sml.jpg

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.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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

Figure 28
http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/f28-nadershah.jpg

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.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

Nezami Is an Iranian Poet

Figure 29
http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/f29-nezami-statue-tabriz.jpg

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”.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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.

*****

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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. ●

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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

http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/f30-kartir-inscription-sml.jpg

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.”

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

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
http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/f31-katibeh-bistoon.jpg

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.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

Baladhuri (?-c. 892 AD)

بلاذري

Full: Ahmad ibn Yahya Baladhuri

احمدبن يحيي بلاذري

Work: Futuh al Buldan (Conquests of Lands)

فتوح البلدان

The Iranian historian Baladhuri (died 279 Hijri) considers Aran (Aghvank) part of Armenia. He clarifies the fact of a considerable Armenian presence in Aran (Aghvank) as follows: “An inhabitant of Bardha (Partaw, Պարտաւ), Muhammad ibn Ismail and others, Abu Bara Anbassat ibn Bahr Armani also Muhammad ibn Bashar Qali from their notables and Barmak ibn Abdullah Dabili (of Dvin) and Muhammad ibn Mkhis Khlati and a number of others recounted about persons knowledgeable in affaires of the Armenians and I relate their words in a correct manner, matching them against one another and completing them. It’s been known that Shmshat and Qaliqla (Cilicia) and Arjis (Arjesh, Արճեշ) and Bajonis are parts of fourth Armenia and the Khora of Bosforjan (Vaspurakan) and Dabil (Dvin) and Seraj and Baghrevand (Bagrevand) is called third Armenia and Jorzan (Georgia) second Armenia and Sisjan (Sisakan) and Aran (Aghvank) and Tiflis (Tbilisi) are first Armenia… Jorzan and Aran fell under the Khazars and the rest came under Roman occupation.”

That Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Aghvank were two completely separate entities throughout history is also reflected in the religious developments in both regions. Baladhuri tells us that the people of Azarbaijan (the real) were already Muslims short after the Arab invasions: “When Ali ibn abu Taleb became caliph, he appointed Saad ibn Saria Khazaii later Ash’ath ibn Qeis as rulers of Azarbaijan (the real H.) …When Ash’ath arrived in Azarbaijan (the real H.), he saw that most of the people had converted to Islam and read the Qur’an” while it is known that the acceptance of Islam did not go so smoothly in Aghvank. The Aghvans assimilated mainly with Armenians in the following centuries.

When in December 2005 the genocidal “Azeris” were barbarically destroying the centuries old stone-crosses of the ancient Jugha cemetery in Nakhijevan, in response to the pleadings of the head of the Armenian church Garegin II to stop the savagery, the religious leader of fake “Azerbaijan” Allahshokur Pashazadeh shamelessly retorted: “do not worry, these are the monuments of our Albanian (Aghvan H.) “ancestors”.” That Nakhijevan could never have been a part of faraway Aghvank is obvious however, it is noteworthy to quote a part of Baladhuri’s narration of the first Arab incursion into Aghvank: “the invaders reached Aran (Aghvank H.) from the south and crossing through Nakhijevan”. ●

Dinwari (Dinawari) (828-894 AD)

دينوري

Full: Abu Hanifa Ahmad ibn Dawood Dinwari

ابو جنيفه احمدبن داود دينوري

Work: Akhbar ut Tawal

اخبار الطوال

The renowned third century Hijri Iranian historian, scientist and literary figure, author of at least twenty one works in different fields, Dinwari (died around 281 Hijri) has also recorded information about geographic features of Armenia, Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Aghvank through his account of Babak Khorramdin’s history. Aghvank is considered part of Armenia according to this historical narration.

He relates the administrative changes of the Iranian Sassanid Empire in the time of Anushirvan (Khosro, Khusrau I) as follows: “Anushirvan divided the Iranian kingdom into four major iqlims (realms, koosts) and appointed a trustee as the ruler for each. One of these iqlims was consisted of Khorasan, Sistan and Kerman; the other Isfahan, Ghom (Qom), the lands of Jebal (Medes), Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Armenia; the third Fars, Ahvaz and until Bahrain and the fourth iqlim included Iraq until the borders with the Romans.”

Dinwari confirms that the River Kur is the southernmost part of Aghvank and the Arax River separates Armenia from Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan). ●

Ya’qubi (?-897 AD)

يعقوبي

Full: Ibn Wadih Ahmad ibn abu Ya’qub Ishaq ibn Jafar Isfahani

ابن واضح احمدبن ابي يعقوب اسحاق بن جغفر اصفهاني

Works: Tarikh Ya’qubi (Ya’qubi History), Al Buldan (Countries)

تاريخ يعقوبي

Ibn Wadih Ahmad ibn abu Ya’qub Ishaq ibn Jafar Isfahani (died 284 Hijri) is a well known Islamic historian and geographer. He was a descendant of Wadih, the Abbasid caliph Mansour’s appointed governor of Armenia and Azarbaijan (the real). Ya’qubi lived in Armenia for some years and served some of its governors.

In his Tarikh (History), Ya’qubi considers Aran (Aghvank) a province in Armenia and says it was known as the third Armenia that was conquered by the Iranian king Ghobad (Sassanid king Kavad, Kaveh). He writes: “The third part (Armenia) includes Bardha (Partaw) a city in the province of Aran (Aghvank), Beylakan (Pytakaran) and Bab ul Abwab (Darband, Chor)”

In his geographic work Al Buldan (Countries) he names places and cities in three parts of Armenia, first: Dabil (Dvin), Qaliqla (Cilicia), Khlat, Shimshad, Savad; second: Bardha (Partaw, Պարտաւ), Beylakan (Pytakaran, Փայտակարան), Qabalah (Kabalak, Կապաղակ), Darband; third: Khazran (Jorzan, Georgia), Tiflis (Tbilisi), etc. As cities of Azarbaijan he cites: Ardebil, Varthan, Shiz, Marand, Tabriz, Mianeh, Urmia, Khoy, Salmas, etc.

In Al Buldan, Ya’qubi calls the language of the people of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) Pahlavi Azari and considers the people of that region of Iranian origin.

It’s noteworthy to mention the events of 238 Hijri (852 AD) in his History where the Turkish Buqa khan was sent by Al-Mutawakkil (847-861) to suppress the uprising of Armenians: “Buqa killed many Armenians and their leaders (why am I not surprised? H.)”, eventually Buqa was defeated by the rebels and the caliph appointed Muhammad ibn Khalid ibn Yazid ibn Mazid Sheibani as the ruler of Armenia. The rebels ended the uprising and Muhammad pardoned them. ●

Ibn Khordadbeh (c. 820-912/913 AD)

ابن خردادبه

Full: Abulqassem Ubeidullah ibn Abdullah ibn Khordadbeh

ابوالقاسم عبيدالله بن عبدالله بن خردادبه

Work: Al Masalek wal Mamalek (Roads and Countries)

المسالك و الممالك

Ibn Khordadbeh (died 300 Hijri) was the director of communication and information of western parts of Iran in the time of the Abbasid caliph Al Wathiq (842-847 AD). He is the author of a geographic work about the roads and countries. The roads of Armenia, Georgia, Aghvank up to areas around the Caspian are described in his work.

He says Armenia consists of four parts. He considers Aran (Aghvank) part of first Armenia (Armenia Maior). He writes: “The First Armenia includes Sisjan (Sisakan, Սիսական) and Aran (Aghvank) and Tiflis (Tbilisi) and Bardha (Partaw, Պարտաւ) and Beylakan (Pytakaran, Փայտակարան) and Qabalah (Kabalak, Կապաղակ) and Shirvan.

Ibn Khordadbeh gives separate accounts of cities in Azarbayegan (Azarbaijan, Atrpatakan) and Aran. He places cities and villages in Azarbaijan to the South of the Arax, north of Zanjan and Hamadan and describes Aran and Georgia with cities Tiflis (Tbilisi), Bardhae (Partaw), Beylakan (Pytakaran), Qabalah (Kabalak), Shirvan, etc. and mentions that they were conquered by Iranian king Anushirvan from Khazar rule.

Confirming yet again that a “great Azerbaijan” two sides of the Arax River is nothing but fairytale and a 20th century historic falsification, he lists the rulers of lands within Iran and outside its boundaries who obeyed the central Iranian government keeping some kind of independence: Great Kushan shah, Great Armanestan shah (Armenia), Borjan shah (Georgian), Gilan shah… Aturpatekan shah (Azarbaijan the real), Kerman shah, Alan shah (Alans = Ossetians), Turan shah… Kashmiran shah, Reyhan shah (in India), Aran shah (Aghvank), Shirvan shah, etc., etc., etc. ●

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

Tabari (838-923 AD)

طبري

Full: Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Jarir ibn Yazid ibn Khaled Amoli Tabari

ابوجعفر محمدبن جريربن يزيدبن خالد آملي طبري

Work: Tarikh

تاريخ

Perhaps the greatest Islamic historian of all times, the author of the monumental multi-volume work “History”, admired as the sage of his era by his successors, the Iranian historian Tabari (native of Tabaristan, present day Mazandaran) was born in 224 Hijri and died in 310, according to Ibn Nadim, author of al Fihrist (the List).

Many of sources cited by Tabari have not survived, which renders Tabari’s work even more important. His work which gives the accounts of events until 302 Hijri has been completed by Arib ibn Sa’ad Qurtubi which includes those until 320.

Regarding the Caucasus in times of Arab conquests and caliphate in the first couple of Hijri centuries, his Tarikh ar Resal wal Moluk (تاريخ الرسل و الملوک) is a trustworthy document. Most of the people whose tales are related by Tabari were present in the wars in the time of Arab invasions in the Caucasus.

Tabari’s report of the second caliph Omar’s order to Armenians and peoples living in “Armenia and Abwab” (Aghvank which was part of Armenia), where he gives them assurance that their lives will be spared if they obey him and his appointed ruler, concludes: “…in case of war, they have to participate… Whoever accepts to obey will pay the jizyah (tribute tax H.) except for those who join the army… whoever is not needed to participate can stay and pay the jizyah like the people of Azarbaijan (the real H.)” This shows that first, even Christians were allowed to join the military and be exempted from paying heavy taxes second, the people of the real Azarbaijan had already converted to Islam, obeyed Omar and were paying their taxes in the early years of Arab conquest whereas the people of Armenia and Aghvank had remained Christian. This also proves that Aghvank and Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) were two distinct regions and religiously unrelated.

Recounting the events of 145 Hijri, Tabari also reports the Khazar invasion into Armenia from Bab ul Abwab (Darband, Chor) and their occupation of lands north of the River Kur. This clearly shows that there was no doubt in Tabari’s mind that Aghvank was a part of Armenia. The Khazars repeated the intrusion two years later, pillaged Aghvank and returned to their land with booty and prisoners.

Again in 183 Hijri, using the pretext of his daughter’s death on the way to Aghvank to marry Fadhl ibn Yahya ibn Khalid Barmaki, the caliph appointed ruler of Armenia, Azarbaijan (the real) and Jebal (land of Medes = western part of Iran), the Khazar khan once again attacked Armenia from Darband and killed the Muslims and Dhimmis and took a hundred thousand slaves. “Such mayhem was never heard of before in Islamic era” Tabari confesses.

Tabari gives accounts of Yussof ibn abis Saj’s wars with Smbat Bagratuni from 295 Hijri (908 AD) and Saj’s appointment by al Muqtadir as the representative of the caliph in Armenia and Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan). ●

Ibn Faqih (late 9th-early 10th centuries AD)

ابن فقيه

Full: Abu Abdullah Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Faqih Hamadani

ابي عبدالله احمد بن محمد بن اسحاق ابن فقيه همداني

Work: Mokhtasar al Buldan (Concise Book of Lands)

مختصر البلدان

Ibn Faqih wrote his geographic work in about 290 Hijri. According to Ibn Faqih, Armenia consisted of four parts what he calls first, second, third and fourth Armenia. Aran (Aghvank) and Sisjan (Sisakan) were a part of first Armenia (Medz Hyke, Armenia Maior). It should be noted that in another part of his work he places them in fourth Armenia. He names several cities in Aghvank among others: Bardhae (Partaw, Պարտաւ), Beylakan (Pytakaran, Փայտակարան), Qabalah (Kabalak, Կապաղակ), Shirvan, Shabran, Sheki (Shakeh, Շաքէ), Shamkhor, Bilasjan.

According to Ibn Faqih, the region north of the Arax and south of the Kur is part of Armenia and the Arax is the border between Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Armenia. Regarding Neshwi (Nakhijevan), Ibn Faqih places it in the third Armenia.

Concerning the origin of the name of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan), Ibn Faqih says: “Azarbaijan is (related to) Azarbad ibn Iran… or Azarbad ibn Biurasp.” ●

Massoudi (c. 896-956 AD)

مسعودي

Full: Abul Hassan Ali ibn Hussein Massoudi

ابوالحسن علي بن حسين مسعودي

Work: Muruj udh Dhahb wa Ma’aden ul Jowhar (The Meadows of Gold and the Mines of Gems), At Tanbih wal Ashraf, etc.

مروج الذهب و معادن الجوهر, التنبيه و الاشراف

The great Islamic scientist and historian native of Maghreb, Massoudi, died 344 Hijri according to ibn Nadim, is the author of many works some of which historical and geographical. He traveled far and wide and recorded his observations and research in those lands. The two works cited above are considered an encyclopedia in the domain of historical geography. Massoudi’s work has an eminent place among Islamic works related to the Caucasus. “I spent quite some time in Armenia, Azarbaijan (the real H.), Aran (Aghvank) and Beylakan (Pytakaran H.)”, Massoudi explains. According to him “the realm of the Persians included the entire Medes and Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) until the vicinity of Armenia, Aran and Beylakan…” which confirms that Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Aghvank were different entities.

Massoudi considers the dialects of Pahlavi, Dari and Azari from the same origin, their vocabularies one and the same and calls all of them languages of the Farsi group. He is among the Islamic historians who have used the term Azari to describe the Persian dialect of the people of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan).

A noteworthy event also related by Massoudi is the uprising of Babak Khorramdin (from 820s AD) against the caliphate, to restore the ancient Iranian religion and to free Iran from the Arab rule. I mention this because not having any historical background the “Azeri” fakers have stolen every Iranian hero, poet, scientist, ruling dynasty, etc. along with the name of their counterfeit “state”, to fabricate their jumbled “history”. Twisting history beyond recognition, they regard Babak Khorramdin, native of the real Azarbaijan, as “their” greatest hero who fought to liberate “Turkish” Azarbaijanis from Iranian rule (!) whereas it’s hardly conceivable Babak knew any Turks in his lifetime let alone having been a Turk two full centuries before the Oghuz (Seljuk) invasions.

Another instance of anti-Armenian hate mongering by “Azeris” is their blaming the Armenians for Babak’s painful death, whose limbs were cut off by Afshin, al Mu’tasim’s general who fought Babak. After heavy battles with Afshin up to a thousand of his warriors were killed, his fortress gave in and he had to run north to Armenia. Crossing the Arax the ruler of Aghvank (north to Artsakh), Sahl ibn Smbat (Sahl Smbatian of Aranshah dynasty, Սահլ/Սահղ Սմբատեան), caught him and handed him over to Afshin. This shallow account of history will certainly confuse those who are uninformed of the fact of the matter but even in that case, are the actions of one historic figure reason enough to denounce an entire nation? A closer look at the fact of the matter proves the exact opposite.

In 821 Sahl Smbatian launched a surprise attack on Shikakar fortress and crushed the Arabs who had reduced the Amaras monastery to rubble and had enslaved about a thousand people. Later his participation played an instrumental role in the victory against a 12000 strong Arab army in Mughan plain in 837, the very same year he arrested Babak. Taking these events and Babak’s movement which was directed against the caliph into account, Sahl should have considered Babak a god sent ally but what the “Azeris” don’t want to say is that Babak would attack, harass, plunder and massacre the people of Artsakh and Siunik on regular basis, therefore it’s more because Babak had become a nuisance for people that Sahl handed him over to the Arabs and not out of treachery.

According to Massoudi, Sahl Smbatian hoped that the caliph would grant him the status of king of Aghvank but his wishes didn’t come true. He adds: “Afshin promoted Sahl and gave him gifts and noble attire and a crown. He provided him with guards and servants and exempted him from tax” but Mu’tasim did not make Sahl Smbatian the independent king of Aghvank and he remained only the ruler of Sheki (Shakeh).

In 854 Mu’tasim ordered the Turkish Buqa khan (against who Sahl had also fought) to arrest Sahl Smbatian along with a number of other Armenian rulers and sent them to exile and torture in Samara. He was never heard of afterwards...

This is like a double edge sword for the “Azeris”: if Sahl Smbatian is an Armenian king, then it proves that Aghvank was a part of Armenia. If “Azeris” are truly the descendants of the Aghvans as they absurdly claim, then it was an Aghvan ruler, i.e. an “Azeri” who betrayed Babak, the pretended greatest hero of the “Azeris”. ●

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

Istakhri (Estakhri, ?- 957 AD)

اصطخري

Full: Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Muhammad al Farsi al Istakhri

ابواسحاق ابراهيم بن محمدبن فارسي الاصطخري

Work: Masalek wa Mamalek (Roads and Countries), Sovar al Aqalim (Maps of Lands)

مسالك و ممالك, صور الاقاليم

Istakhri (died 346 Hijri) was from Istakhr (Estakhr) in Fars and traveled in Islamic countries.

Istakhri’s geographic work presents separate maps of Armenia, Aran (Aghvank) and Azarbaijan and gives names of cities in Aran: Beylakan (Pytakaran, Փայտակարան), Varthan (Vartanakert), Shamakhi, Shirvan, Shabran, Abkhaz, Qabalah (Kabalak, Կապաղակ), Sheki (Shakeh, Շաքէ), Ganja (Gandzak, Գանձակ), etc. and Bardhae (Partaw, Պարտաւ) as its capital. He cites Ardebil, Maragha, Urmia, Mianeh, Khuneh, Ujan, Dakharghan (Dehkharghan), Salmas, Khoy, Marand, Tabriz, Barzand, Varthan (Vartanakert), Mughan, Oshneh (Oshno), etc. as cities in Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Ardebil as the capital of the same.

It’s interesting that Istkahri sometimes considers Neshwi (Nakhijevan) part of Azarbaijan (the real) and other times part of Armenia. This is because Nakhijevan would at times be assigned under the administration of real Azarbaijan. This fact can be abused by “Azeris” to claim Nakhijevan. This is misleading simply because at that time fake “Azerbaijan” did not exist and Aghvank and Azarbaijan (the real) were accounted for as separate entities, with Aghvank seen as part of Armenia. Istakhri’s account of the borders of Azarbaijan (the real) eliminates all doubts: “the limits of Azarbayegan are from Tarom to Zangan (Zanjan) to Dinvar (Dinawar) to Halvan up to the city Zur to Tigris and the borders of Armenia”. Note that according to Istakhri, real Azarbaijan has no borders with Aghvank.

Describing the language of the people of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) Istakhri says: “In these regions everyone speaks Arabic and Persian …the people of Ardebil speak Armenian. Around Bardha (Partaw) there’s a mountain and they have different languages”. About the language of the peoples of Aghvank he says: “Seventy and some groups live around that mountain (Darband H.) and each speaks a different language so that neighbors do not understand the language of one another”.

An interesting point in Istakhri’s book is that he also confirms: “the language of the Khazars is similar to Turkish and no other people speak this language”, a proof that not only in Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Armenia, but also in Aghvank not a single soul could understand a word of Turkish in those days. ●

Ibn Rosteh (mid 9th-early 10th centuries AD)

ابن رسته

Full: Abu Ali Ahmad ibn Omar ibn Rosteh

ابو علي احمدبن عمربن رسته

Work: Al A’laq an Nafiseh

الاعلاق النفيسه

Written around the end of the third century Hijri, the late third or early fourth century Hijri Isfahani geographer Ibn Rosteh confirms Aghvank as being a province (Khoras = province, from Greek) of Armenia.

He cites Aran (Aghvank), Jorzan (Georgia), Neshwi (Nakhijavan, Նախիջևան), Khlat, Dabil (Dvin, Դւին), Saghdbil, Seraj, Arjish (Arjesh), Bajonis, Sisjan (Sisakan) and Bab ul Abwab (Darband, Chor) as Khoras of Armenia.

Regarding Azarbaijan (the real) he names Ardebil, Marand, Bajrevan (Bagrevand, Բագրևանդ), Varthan (Vartanakert), Maragha as its provinces or cities (Khoras). ●

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

Ibn Hawqal (Haukal, ?-977 AD)

ابن حوقل

Full: Abulqassem Muhammad ibn Hawqal

ابوالقاسم محمدبن حوقل

Work: Sourat ul Ardh (The Map of the Earth)

صورﺓ الارض

Figure 32

http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/f32-ibn-hawqal-map.jpg

Ibn Hawqal’s Map of Armenia, Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Aghvank (Ar Ran)

The fourth century Hijri geographer Ibn Hawqal Baghdadi (died 367 Hijri) who traveled in the region, continues the work of Istakhri. He has lived for a while in Armenia and Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan). He dedicates an important chapter of his work to Armenia, Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and Aran (Aghvank) and presents the three regions separately on his map. Ibn Hawqal confirms that Aran is situated in the north of the Arax River whereas Azarbaijan is to the south of Arax.

He mentions different capitals: Bardha (Partaw) for Aran (Aghvank) and Ardebil for Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan).

Ibn Hawqal gives independent accounts of Armenia, Aran (Aghvank) and Azarbaijan. He also mentions Bardhae (Partaw, Պարտաւ), Jinzeh (Gandzak, Ganja, Գանձակ), Shamkhor, Shamakhieh, Shirvan, Shabran, Qabalah (Kabalak, Կապաղակ) and Sheki (Shakeh, Շաքէ) in Aran (Aghvank) and Ardebil, Tabriz, Salmas, Khoy, Urmia, Maragha, Oshno, Mianaj (Mianeh), Marand, etc. in Azarbaijan.

He uses the term Azari to define the dialect of the people of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) to distinguish it from other dialects of Persian, a simple fact that exposes the fallacy of applying the term Azari or “Azeri” to the Turkish dialect spoken in the region. He says people of Azarbaijan speak Farsi but the merchants and land owners also understand Arabic. About Armenia he confirms that the people speak different dialects of Armenian also in Dabil (Dvin) and Neshwi (Nakhijevan). The people of Aran speak Arani, also different infidel ethnicities speak their own languages according to Ibn Hawqal. Interesting enough, the language of the Aghvans had survived until Ibn Hawqal’s times and there’s still not an iota of evidence of any Turkish in the region. It should be noted that the people of Azarbaijan were already Muslim centuries before this, yet another fact that proves Azarbaijan and Aran were not a single entity.

According to Ibn Hawqal: “In ancient times Dabil (Dvin) was ruled by Snbat ibn Ashot (Smbat) king of Armenia and since the times of his forefathers, their notables held it until Abulghassem Yussof ibn abis Saj conquered that city...” in another place, describing the road from Partaw, capital of Aghvank to Dvin he adds: “the road from Bardha to Dabil in Armenia and all the cities and villages there were ruled by the Armenian king Snbat ibn Ashot until Yussof ibn abis Saj usurped it with treachery and cruelty against the orders of Allah and his prophet” (in 915 AD).

Ibn Hawqal reports that in his time Aran (Aghvank) and eastern parts of Armenia were all under the administration of the ruler of Azarbaijan (the real). This shows that Aran and Azarbaijan (the real) were not one country, what the “Azeris” try to make the world believe, rather, the administrative division of regions under Iranian rule changed from time to time, sometimes putting parts of Aran or Armenia under the administration of the ruler of Azarbaijan (the real). ●

Kharazmi (Khwarizmi, ?- 997 AD)

خوارزمي

Full: Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Yussof Kharazmi

ابوعبدالله محمدبن احمدبن يوسف خوارزمي

Works: Mafatih ul Ulum (Keys to the Sciences)

مفاتيح العلوم

Kharazmi (died 387 Hijri, not to be mistaken with the great Iranian mathematician (lived 780-850 AD) whose name gave us the term algorithm), who lived in the fourth century Hijri (10th c. AD) gives the following explanation about Pahlavi Persian: “Fahlavieh (Pahlavi) belongs to the Iranian group of languages which was spoken by kings in their courts. This word is attributed to Pahleh and it’s the name that was given to the following five cities (lands): Isfahan, Rey, Hamadan, Mah Nahavand and Azarbijan (Azarbaijan the real H.)”. ●

Sohrab (Ibn Srabion)

سهراب

ابن سرابيون

Work: Ajayeb ul Aqalim… (Wonders of Places…)

عجائب الاقاليم السبعه الي نهايت العماره

A fourth century Hijri geographer of probably Iranian origin has dedicated an important chapter of his book to rivers. Sohrab mentions the River Kur as a river inside Armenia and the River Arax an external river of Armenia. This confirms that Aghvank was considered a part of Armenia in his days. ●

Anonymous

Work: Hodud ul A’alam min al Mashreq ilal Maghreb

حدود العالم من المشرق الي المغرب

The author of this valuable geographic work from the fourth century Hijri is unknown. The book is written in Farsi and includes a description of Aghvank. “Khonan is a region on the banks of the River Kur which is the border between Armenia and Aran (Aghvank)” which places Aran to the north of the River Kur according to the anonymous author of Hodud ul A’alam. ●

Muqaddasi (Moghaddasi) (c. 942-c. end of 10th c.)

مقدسي

Full: Shamseddin abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn abu Bakr Bana’a Shami Muqaddasi

شمس الدين ابوعبدالله محمدبن احمدبن ابي بکر بناﺀ شامي مقدسي

Work: Ahsan at Taghasim fi Ma’rifat al Aqalim (The Best Divisions for Knowledge of the Regions)

احسن التقاسيم في معرفه الاقاليم

A well known geographer from the fourth century Hijri (born around 331 Hijri), Muqaddasi divides Iran into eight parts (اقاليم Aqalim =plural of اقليم iqlim = realm) and cites Azarbaijan (the real) and Aran (Aghvank) as separate iqlims (khoras).

He describes the three khoras of Rahab as Aran (Aghvank), Armenia and Azarbaijan (the real) as follows: “The first Aran, to the north of Aran Lake (the Caspian), the second Armenia and the third Azarbaijan.”

About Aghvank he writes: “Aran is like an island between the Lake (Caspian) and Arax, and the Malek (= king = Kur from Koorosh = Cyrus) River runs through it.” As cities in Aran he mentions Bardhae (Partaw, Պարտաւ), Tiflis (Tbilisi), Shamkhor, Ganja (Gandzak, Գանձակ), Shirvan, Bakooh (Baku), Shabran, Bab ul Abwab (Darband, Chor, Chol, Չող), Sheki (Shakeh, Շաքէ), Abkhaz among others.

Regarding Azarbaijan (the real) he writes: “Azarbaijan is a khora founded by Azarbad (Atropat, Atrpat) son of Biurasp. Its capital is Ardebil and its cities are Rasbah, Tabriz, Jabravan, Khunaj (Khooneh), Mianaj (Mianeh), Saraw (Sarab), Barwi, Varthan (Vartanakert), Mughan, Meimand and Barzand, Salmas, Urmia, Maragha and Marand… Zanjan is on the border of Azarbaijan (the real H.)”.

Muqaddasi calls the languages of these eight Aqalim (khoras) of Ajami (Iranian) origin “some of them Dari (one of the major branches of Persian close to the modern Farsi H.) and some complicated, but all of them Parsi …the language of the people of Azarbaijan (the real H.) isn’t as intelligible (influences of old Pahlavi dialect H.). In Armenia people speak Armenian and in Aran, Arani. Their Persian is intelligible and is similar to the dialects of Khorasan.” Not a single cloud patch of Turkish in the horizon. ●

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

Abu Reyhan Biruni (Raihan, Rayhan) (973-1048 AD)

ابوريحان بيروني

Full: Abu Reyhan Muhammad ibn Ahmad Biruni

ابوريحان محمدبن احمد بيروني

Work: Athar ul Baghieh, Al Jamahir, etc.

آثار الباقيه, الجماهير

The great Iranian scientist, physicist, mathematician, geographer, historian and literary figure Abu Reyhan Biruni (about 360s–440s Hijri) in his accounts of the region mentions Bardha (Partaw) a city in Aran (Aghvank) close to the River Kur, Beylakan (Pytakaran), Khlat, Arjish (Arjesh, Argishtiuni, Արճեշ, Արգիշտիունի), Shirvan and Bab ul Abwab (Darband, Chor). He explains that Bab ul Abwab is also known as Darband of Khazar and Bakooh (Baku) is the source of white naft (oil). Abureyhan considers all these regions part of Armenia until Vartan (Vartanakert) which according to him was under Azarbayegan’s (Azarbaijan the real) jurisdiction. ●

Abulfada (Abul Fida, ?- 1331 AD)

ابوالفداﺀ

Full: Emadeddin Ismail ibn Muhammad ibn Omar Abulfada

عمادالدین اسمعيل بن محمدبن عمر ابوالفداﺀ

Work: Taqwim al Buldan

البلدان تقويم

The seventh/eighth century Hijri historian and geographer Abulfada (died 732 Hijri) is a descendant of Salaheddin (Saladin) Ayyubi. His work deals mainly with Iran but it contains valuable information about Asia Minor as well. A chapter in his work is about Armenia, Aran (Aghvank) and Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) with detailed descriptions of their geographic features.

Abulfada says: “Armenia, Aran (Aghvank H.) and Azarbaijan (the real H.) are three large and separate realms that are represented together on maps by the experts”.

Describing the borders of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) he states: “it is limited by Deylam in the east and Iraq to the south… Aran’s (Aghvank H.) borders starts in Bab (Darband H.) to Tiflis (Tbilisi H.) until near Arax River in a place known as Hajeiran… And Azarbaijan (the real H.) begins in Hajeiran and stretches till Zanjan, Dinvar to Halvan and the city Zur and turns until it reaches near Tigris and the borders of Armenia” which clearly shows that an “Azerbaijan” north of the Arax is nothing but 20th century mythology. ●

Qudamah ibn Jafar Katib Baghdadi

قدامت بن جعفر کتيب بغدادي

Work: Kitab ul Kharaj

کتاب الخراج

Qudamah ibn Jafar mentions the khoras and considers Aran (Aghvank) a khora of Armenia. ●

Ibn Miskuyeh (?-1030 AD)

ابن مسکويه

Full: Abu Ali Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Miskuyeh Razi

ابو علي احمدبن محمدبن مسکويه رازي

Work: Tajarib al Umam (Experiences of Nations)

تجارب الامم

A famous Iranian historian, Ibn Miskuyeh (died 421 Hijri) served the rulers of Al Buyeh. In Tajarib al Umam he narrates the Russian invasion in Aghvank and the events of Yussof ibn abis Saj’s time, the caliph al Muqtadir appointed ruler of Azarbaijan (the real), Aghvank and Armenia. Abis Saj stops paying taxes to the caliph (299 Hijri). He treacherously obtains the rule of Qazvin, Rey, Zanjan and Abhar. ●

Bakri Qurtubi (?-c. 1094 AD)

البكري قرطبي

Full: Abu Ubeid Abdullah al Bakri Qurtubi (of Cordoba)

ابو عبید عبدالله البكري قرطبي

Work: Al Massalek wal Mamalek

المسالک و الممالک

Bakri Qurtubi (died around 487 Hijri) is a well known Arab geographer from Spain. Besides Al Massalek wal Mamalek, he compiled one of the earliest Islamic encyclopedias. Bakri considers Aran (Aghvank) a khora in Armenia. He explains: “Khoras of Armenia: Aran (Aghvank), Jorzan (Georgia), Neshwi (Nakhijevan), Khlat, Dabil (Dvin), Seraj, Jordbil, Arjish (Arjesh), Sisjan (Sisakan), the city of Bab ul Abwab (Darband, Chor) and Hey Darjan”. He confirms that Azarbaijan (the real) is a separate khora. ●

Idrissi (1100-1163 AD)

ادريسي

Full:Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Muhammad Sharif Idrissi

ابوعبدالله محمدبن محمد الادريسي

Work:Nuzhat ul Mushtaq fi Ikhtiraq al Afaq (The Delight for Who Desires to Journey through Different Horizons)

نزهة المشتاق في الاختراق الافاق

The sixth century (493–around 560) Hijri Andalusian geographer Sharif Idrissi studied mathematics, history and geography in Cordoba and visited Asia Minor among other destinations. From 1138 he lived at the court of the Sicilian king Roger II, who ordered him to draw the map of the world. In his manuscript he has drawn the maps of Armenia, Aran (Aghvank) and Azarbaijan as three separate entities. ●

Toosi (Tusi)

طوسي

Full: Muhammad ibn Mahmood ibn Ahmad Toosi

محمدبن محمودبن احمد طوسي

Work: Aja’eb ul Makhluqat (Marvels of Creatures)

عجائب المخلوقات

The Iranian geographer, Toosi lived in the sixth century Hijri and dedicated his work to Tughril ibn Arslan ibn Tughril, a Seljuk ruler of Iraq. He says: “Bardha (Partaw H.) …is a city on the border of Armenia to the Caucasus Mountain.” Note that this is already in the times after the Seljuk invasions. Not a single sign of “Azeri” or “Azerbaijan” in the region north of the Arax is yet to be discerned. ●

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

Ibn Athir (1160-1233 AD)

ابن اثير

Full: Izzeddin Ali ibn Athir

عزالدين علي بن اثير

Work: Al Kamel fit Tarikh (Complete History)

الکامل في التاريخ

An important and well known historian of the sixth and seventh Hijri centuries, Ibn Athir (555 – 630 Hijri), continues Tabari’s work and recounts the events of the centuries after Tabari. He presents valuable facts concerning the Mongol and Tatar invasions in Aran (Aghvank) and Shirvan. He has always mentioned Aghvank distinct from Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) throughout his book. For instance, regarding the Seljuk sultan Mahmood he writes: “The vast realm of Mahmood consisted of Rey and its districts, the city (land) of Jebal, Isfahan, Fars, Khuzestan, Iraq, Azarbaijan (the real H.), Aran (Aghvank H.), Armenia, Diarbekr, Jazira (Mesopotamia), Mosul, Sham (Syria H.) and other places.”

He narrates the events of 430 Hijri and informs that tens of thousands of Turks “raided Muslim (conquered H.) lands around Kashghar and Blasghun, pillaged and plundered, then converted to Islam and beheaded twenty thousand sheep on the day of Eed Qurban… Before that, these tribes had to stay together to defend themselves from the Muslims but after accepting Islam, they dispersed and were scattered throughout Muslim lands…”

Relating the events of 440 Hijri Ibn Athir says: “In this year, a huge number of Oghuz Turks (Seljuks H.) came to Ibrahim Yenal (half sibling of Tughril and the ruler of Rey and Hamadan). He told them: my land does not have the capacity of housing and feeding you. You’d better go to Rum (Asia Minor), fight the infidels in the Cause of Allah.”

In 440s Hijri (1054 AD), Tughril invaded Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and headed towards Tabriz. Amir Wahsoodan ibn Muhammad Ravvadi the ruler of that land offered his submission to Tughril… Later out of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan), Tughril took the direction of Aran (Aghvank) and raided Ganja (Gandzak), the capital of Aran (Aghvank). Abul Aswar the ruler of Ganja submitted as well. Tughril took some hostages from local rulers but allowed them to govern their land according to Ibn Athir.

The sad events of 457 Hijri (1065 AD) are also mentioned by Ibn Athir (he cites 456 Hijri as the date of this event). On this ill day befell the tragedy of the rape of Ani by the bloodthirsty Alp Arslan, the Seljuk bandit “king”. On Turkish websites, the Seljuk calamity is presented as the salvation of Armenians from the Byzantines. The Turkish disinformation has the easy job of twisting historical facts 180 degrees and spamming the lies all over the internet to increase the credibility of their falsifications. ●

Yaqut Hamawi (1179-1229 AD)

ياقوت حموي

Full: Abu Abdullah Yaqut ibn Abdullah Hamawi

ابوعبدالله ياقوت بن عبداله حموي

Work: Mo’jam al Buldan (Book of Countries)

معجم البلدان

The sixth/Seventh centuries Hijri geographer Yaqut Hamawi is the author of the well known geographic encyclopedia Mo’jam al Buldan.

Yaqut believes that Aran is an Iranian name. According to him, “Between Aran (Aghvank H.) and Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan H.) there’s a river called Aras (Arax H.). Aran is situated to the north of Aras and Azarbaijan lies to the south of this river”. Still no “Azerbaijan” north of the Arax! He also cites Deylam, Gilan and Tarom as the internal eastern limits of Azarbaijan (the real). Yaqut mentions Tabriz “the largest city of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan H.). Its other cities are Maragha, Khoy, Salmas, Urmia, Ardebil, Marand, etc.”

The Mughan plain in southeast of present day fake “Azerbaijan” is the land of origin of a people known as Mokk in Armenian and reported by Herodotus as Mycians (Miks, Muxoi, Mukhoi). In Islamic texts they are referred to as the Mughan. Yaqut Hamawi relates the mythological origins of Gilan (north of Iran, near the Caspian, Mazandaran and Azarbaijan the real) and Mughan and believes they are proper names. He says: “Mughan and his brother Gilan were sons of Kashaj ibn Japheth ibn Nuh (Noah H.) and they lived in Tabaristan (Mazandaran H.).” This story reveals that the peoples of Gilan and Mughan are related from ancient times and are of Iranian origin.

Describing the language of the people of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) Yaqut Hamawi pulverizes the myth of Azari having anything to do with Turkish: “they speak a language which is called Azari and nobody understands it besides themselves”. ●

Zachariah Qazvini (Ghazvini) (1203-1283 AD)

زكريا قزويني

Full: Zachariah Emadeddin ibn Muhammad ibn Mahmood Qazvini

زكريا عمادالدين بن محمدبن محمود قزويني

Works: Athar al Bilad wa Akhbar al Ibad (Vestiges of Countries and Information on Men), Aja’eb ul Makhluqat wa Ghara’eb ul Mawjudat (Marvels of Creature and Strange Beings)

آثارالبلاد واخبارالعباد

عجائب المخلوقات و غرائب الموجودات

In Zachariah Qazvini’s geographical work about Aghvank we read: “Aran (Aghvank H.) is a land near Azarbaijan (the real H.), Armenia and Abkhazia where there are many cities. The provinces of Aran are Ganja (Gandzak H.), Shirvan and Beylakan (Pytakaran H.) …The River Kur runs between Armenia and Aran …Mughan is a vast province in Azarbaijan (the real H.).” ●

Hamdollah Qazvini (Ghazvini) (1281-1349 AD)

حمدالله قزويني

Full: Zineddin Ibn Hamdollah Mostowfi Qazvini

زين الدين بن حمدالله مستوفي قزويني

Work: Nuzhat ul Qulub (The Delight of Hearts)

نزهت القلوب

Hamdollah Qazvini (seventh/eighth centuries Hijri) cites the cities of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan), among others: “Tabriz, Oujan, Ardebil, Khalkhal, Shahrood, Meshkin, Anar, Ahar, Nowzar, Khoy, Salmas, Urmia, Sarab, Miana, Maragha, Marand, Zanjan…” where not a single one of them has anything to do with Aghvank.

Writing about the language of the people of Maragha in real Azarbaijan he confirms: “they speak a modified dialect of Pahlavi”. This shows that as late as the eighth century Hijri (14th century AD), the darkest days of the Mongol rule, the people of Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) still spoke their original Iranian language and not Turkish. ●

Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406)

ابن خلدون

Full: Abu Zayd Abdurrahman ibn Muhammad ibn Khaldun

ابو زيد عبد الرحمن بن محمد بن خلدون

An internationally respected scholar, Ibn Khaldun was born in 732 Hijri in Tunis and died in 808 Hijri. He met Teimur (Timberline) in Damascus when Teimur held it under siege. Writing about lands under Islamic rule, he considers Aran (Aghvank) of its fifth part and a land neighboring Armenia and Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan). He reports the Mongol invasion of Aran in 618 Hijri and their pillage of Beylakan (Pytakaran) and also the attack of the Georgians, who he mistakenly considers Turks (!), in 619 Hijri. ●

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

Armenian Historians

In 1924 Bartold delivered a series of lectures at a university in Baku. Once he was asked “aren’t the Aghvans and the Armenians the same people? It’s hard to imagine that a nation who had a writing system and a translation of the Bible suddenly lost their language and disappeared from the scene of history.”

While Bartold responded by citing examples of other ethnicities with a similar fate, nevertheless, this question itself confirms that the Armenians are the closest nation to the Aghvans culturally, historically, religiously, racially and geographically, and it is not surprising that the records of Armenian historians dealing with Aghvank throughout centuries are the most exhaustive of all.

Especially after Mesrop Mashtots’ invention of the Armenian alphabet at the end of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth century AD, the Golden Age of the Armenian literature brought forth numerous authors who recorded the historic accounts of their time and translated those of their predecessors into Armenian. Among these are Movses Khorenatsi, Pavstos Buzand, Agathangelos, Sebeos and Ghazar Parpetsi, who have also chronicled the events pertaining to the Aghvans.

Keeping in mind the limitless rancor and hate propaganda against the Armenians that has intensified after their miserable defeat from the Armenians in their self-perpetrated war on Artsakh, the ugly manifestations of this hatred in the barbaric slaughter of Gurgen Markarian on February 19, 2004 by the “Azeri” monster Ramil Safarov, the savage destruction of the ancient Jugha cemetery in December 2005 in front of the eyes of an indifferent civilized world, the endless warmongering rhetoric from the highest “Azeri” authorities, to name but a few, it is certain that the mention of the word Armenian throws the “Azeris” into a hysterical frenzy rejecting everything coming from Armenian sources, ancient or modern. It is as if the fifth century Armenian historians who never saw a Turk in their lives had supernatural prophetic powers to foresee that Turks would ravage the civilizations west of the Caspian starting six hundred years after their time and a fake “Azerbaijan” would be counterfeited on the soil of their homeland fifteen centuries later. Whatever the Turks want to believe and make believe, at least one Armenian historian can in no way be neglected when talking about the Aghvans: Movses Kaghankatouatsi, a historian who is also abused by the “Azeris” who misquote him in their baloney history inventions and attribute him to themselves.

Movses Kaghankatouatsi

Without any doubt, the most complete historical record of Aghvank, History of Aghvank, comes from the seventh century Armenian historian, Movses Kaghankatouatsi, himself a citizen of Kaghankatooik (Kalankatu) a village in the Utik province near the River Tartar in the Aghvank of the day.

It should be noted that another Armenian historian with the same first name, Movses Daskhorantsi, added additional chapters to this work in the 10th century. This has confused some researchers who do not read Armenian and have had to consult second hand sources, to express fallacious ideas about Kaghankatouatsi’s era and have mistakenly put him in the 10th century.

Relating the accounts of war between Khossrow II Parviz (591-628 AD) and Heraclius I (610-641 AD), he writes: “In the winter, the Roman emperor captured 50,000 prisoners from Atrpatakan and moved to the lands north of the Arax, especially Aghvank that had warmer winters and after settling in Aghvank, wrote letters to the Kings of Aghvank, Iberia (Georgia H.), and Armenia to aid the Romans in the war against Iranians”.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

Turks according to Kaghankatouatsi

“In the 38th year of the rule of Khossrow (Khossrow Parviz, the Sassanid king of the time. H.) which was a year of tribulation and affliction …the [Turkish] Jebu (Jebqu/Jabghu) Khan arrived with his son. No one could count their army. When this horrific news came to Aghvank, Hyshak, the ruler of Aghvank who had been appointed to his post by Khossrow, decided to protect our land from the [Turkish] invaders and gather the people in the Partaw fortress... He thought he could resist with the aid of the notables. While he was worryingly anticipating the events, he heard news of the calamity visited upon the fortress of Chor (Darband/Derbend. H.) and its defenders...

Indeed, in the time of the universal misfortune which was in front of us all, first they slammed it against the waves of the immense sea and razed the fortress to the ground. Seeing the malevolent, imminent danger from the evil, monstrous ugly horde with brazen wide, eyelash-less countenances and long hair scattered over their faces like women, Hyshak, shook with fear especially when he saw the arrows that poured upon them like a violent hailstorm from the strung bows of their archers.

In the manner of bloodthirsty wolves and without a grain of shame and decency they attacked the people of the city and ruthlessly slaughtered them in the streets. There was no sign of any mercy in the eyes of these butchers regarding the beautiful, young women either. They massacred the boys and girls as well.

They did not even pity the harmless beings and the disabled and elderly who were unable to fight. Neither they spared the children nor the young, nor would their hearts soften regarding suckling and babies. These innocent infants were lying on the torn apart cadavers of their mothers and were sucking blood from their teats instead of milk. The moment they entered a house, like fire in a haystack, they would burn every place to cinders and they would reduce everything to rubble. The moment they would leave a house they had broken into, they paved the way for the beasts of prey and scavengers from sky and the ground...”

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

The ancestral tree of Aghvans according to Kaghankatouatsi

A most significant record in History of Aghvank is Movses Kaghankatouatsi’s presentation of the ancestral tree of the Aghvans. As it appears, at his time, the Aghvans were seen to be of the same origin as the Armenians, namely the descendants of Hyke, the forefather of the Armenians according to their mythology.

Hyke is no fantastic creature endowed with supernatural powers or unnatural anatomical growths but a mere mortal yet a skilled archer who liberates his people by defeating their tyrannical oppressor, Bel, who he kills, thus, avoiding unnecessary bloodshed on both sides, of fighting soldiers. This is also a reflection of the worldview of the Armenians who even in their mythology disdain senseless loss of human life, albeit in the context of war.

Whether Hyke existed or not is less relevant to our subject, rather the fact that the Aghvans and Armenians were thought to be from the same origin long before the Turks devastated the region, gains importance in the light of the shameless historical fabrications of the “Azeris” to somehow convince the world that they are not the leftovers of hordes of nomadic, Ural-Altaic, Mongolo-Tatar, Oghuz-Turkmen, cattle-herder, prowling invaders that only appeared this side of the Caspian from the 11th century onward, but they are descendants of settled, civilized, Christian Aghvans who had already disappeared from the scene of human history, mainly having assimilated with the Armenians. Besides, the Turks consider a gray wolf, which, according to their oral accounts copulated with a bleeding, mutilated youth, as the origin of the Turks.

Table 6

http://www.armeniangenocide.com/photos/data/500/t06-armenian-aghvan-ancestors.gif

It’s obvious that Movses Kaghankatouatsi has used the fifth century Armenian historian, Movses Khorenatsi’s History of Armenia as his source for the ancestral tree of the Aghvans from Noah to Tigran Yervanduni. Again, whether some of these names belong to the realm of mythology or not is irrelevant, the tree reflects the fact that the Armenians and the Aghvans regarded each other descendants of the same ancestors none of which have anything to do with the Turks, stronger even, after the first couple of names, with any other nation!

It is worth mentioning that Movses Khorenatsi also cites the names of the ancestors of the Hebrews and the Chaldeans in two additional columns parallel to the Armenians.

Hellektor · April 23, 2008

19th and 20th Century Historians

Ever since the fabrication of fake “Azerbaijan” in 1918 and the fertile Soviet ground for producing fiction for consumption as history, the long disappeared nation (in fact multitude of ethnicities) known as the Aghvans, Aluanians or Caucasus Albanians has become a controversial item despite or thanks to their status of being extinct. Any quote from Armenian or Iranian scholars is vehemently labeled by the “Azeris” as chauvinistic while the farcical distortions of history, a natural consequence of forcing a sham state to be regarded as an ancient civilization mainly through the efforts of the arch-falsifier Ziya Bunyatov (Buniyatov) and his followers, can simply not be taken seriously by anybody, not even by a rather pro-Turkish author.

As it is outside the scope of the present essay to mention or quote every scholar from whatever nationality who has written about Aghvank (Aran, Caucasus Albania) in modern times and keeping in mind the political climate of the period or the country where these were produced, a number of more or less impartial authors are presented below leaving the enthusiasts to do their own research into modern historians related to our subject.

Vasili Vladimirovich Bartold (1869-1930)

The renowned Russian academician Bartold has mainly researched and written about the Turks and the inhabitants of Central Asia. He has this to say about the origin of the name Azarbaijan: “Before Alexander’s incursion Iranian Azarbaijan (the real H.) was an inseparable part of Media and didn’t have an independent administration. In the battle of Gaugamela Atropat was the satrap of entire Media… After Alexander, a part of Media that was called the Lesser Media remained under Atropat’s rule. Later on Atropat’s name was added to the name of this land. The Greeks called it Atropatena and the Armenians called it Atrpatakan. This is where the name of Azarbaijan originated.” (Emphasis is mine H.)

Bartold describes “the Arax River which at present separates Iran and the Caucasus” as “a distinct ethnic and racial border between Iranian lands of the Medes and Albania (the usual but confusing term used in Soviet and most western sources for Aghvank H.) in ancient times where the ethnicities were of Japhethite origin according to N. Marr”.

Though there are several fallacies in the above quote, mainly in considering the north of Arax the beginning of the Caucasus whereas its southernmost part is the River Kur, we must be reminded of the political situation of the time where the whole of fake “Azerbaijan” was being treated as the exact geographic situation of Aghvank (Aran, Caucasus Albania). Yet we know that the northeastern part of this fabricated state was once part of Sarmatia the ancestors of today’s Ossets or Alans, also the land of Massagets, Artsakh has sometimes been considered an administrative region of Aghvank under the Sassanids.

Bartold has noted further that the River Kur had become the southern border of Aghvank in the time of the Caliph Marwan. Bartold goes on: “in the historic periods a strong racial and ethnic border has always divided the Iranian Medes from the peoples living in [Caucasus] Albania …the ethnic and racial differences between Azarbaijan (the real H.) and Albania (Aghvank H.) did not disappear even in the Islamic era. The language of the people of Azarbaijan (the real H.) differed from that of the people of Albania (Aghvank H.)”.

Explaining the reason why the name “Azerbaijan” was plagiarized by the Tatars for their fabricated state Bartold opines: “The name Azerbaijan was chosen because it was believed that by creating the Republic of “Azerbaijan” it would eventually be one with the Azarbaijan of Iran. If a proper name could be applied to the present day Republic of “Azerbaijan”, the name Aran would be the correct choice”. ●

Sign In

And the Fraud Had a Name

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Yervant1

Yervant1

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation