249) A Brief Glossary of New Armenian Terms / The Germans / Importance of Genocide Resolutions by Holdwater

Some might have heard of the coined words "ethocide," by Ergun Kirlikovali... along with "genocide.com" and "poli-ethics" by Mahmut Ozan; here are some of my contributions to the lingo of Armenia-Mania:


1) The Armenian AND? Anthem


The Armenian AND? Anthem is named after a conversation between Professors Erich Feigl and Gerard Libaridian, as related in the former's foreword for THE MYTH OF TERROR, signifying how Armenians present their evidence with absolutely no respect for the true facts. The only sources to be valued are those of pro-Armenians, and everything else needs to have explanations provided to fog the truth, or to be discredited, in order to maintain the Armenian genocidal facade:

"…The Armenian view of history is for the most part shared by the public at large. That is no surprise, and it should not be taken as a reproach. Virtually all the information that we have concerning the tragic events of 1915 comes from Armenian sources or from others who know nothing - or at least pretend to know nothing - about the much greater suffering endured by the Moslems at the time. The available information also presents a very incomplete, one-sided view of the events leading up to the tragedy of 1915.

…I did, of course, also meet other people in the course of my research work. I especially recall Dr. Gerard Libaridian, the head of the Armenian Zorian Institute. I spent several hours with Dr. Libaridian in his office in Cambridge, Massachusetts and had an extremely interesting conversation with him. Dr. Libaridian is a brilliant man, bubbling with vitality, knowledge, talent, and self-confidence. One could write a very compelling play based on my conversation with him.

I kept notes of my host's most provocative statements in this fascinating discussion. Several times he mentioned the so-called "Andonian papers". In the early twenties, an Armenian by the name of Aram Andonian published a "collection of documents" (actually they were photographs of "documents"), which he presented as "proof" that the Ottoman government had planned the extermination of the Armenian people. Basically, these "documents" consisted of "orders" that could certainly be compared to the insane acts of a Hitler or Himmler.

Franz Werfel based his splendid novel, The Forty Days of Musa Dagh, entirely on these "extermination orders" of the Ottoman government. Of course, he originally did this in good faith, and when he found out that he had been taken in by a forgery, it was too late. Out of fear of Armenian reprisals, he did not even dare to publicly acknowledge his error.

Since it seemed reasonable to assume that Dr. Libaridian knew that the papers were forgeries, I did not want to waste a single word on the subject. There were so many other, more interesting things to talk about. But remarkably enough, he stuck with Aram Andonian's book, and its "documents". Finally I had to say, "But Doctor Libaridian, you know as well as I that these 'Andonian papers' are forgeries!" I will never forget Dr. Libaridian answer or his facial expression as he replied simply and briefly to my reproach:

"And?"

… and I will never forget that answer. It was not even cold; it was casual, matter-of-fact reply to one who has long since found other strategies but does not even bother to clean house, since he knows that the old dirt can be swept under the rug of history and - who knows? - maybe someday it will come in handy again to help obscure the truth.

Armenians are known to try and discredit scholars who dispute Armenian claims by charging they are not "objective," and must be in the employ of the Turkish government. Although there is no conceivable reason why Austrian professor Erich Feigl should be similarly charged, you can bet Armenians will want to try and pooh-pooh him as well. Any source even remotely out of line with the claims of the extensive genocide.com industry must immediately be discredited, which brings us to the following Armenian Term:


2) The Armeni-Lemming

In order to get to the meaning of The Armeni-Lemming, it would be helpful to recall these words written by Dr. Gwynne Dyer, from his 1976 article, Turkish 'Falsifiers' and Armenian 'Deceivers' (some quarters perhaps might recognize Dr. Dyer as not being "objective," and possibly in the employ of the Turkish government):

The deafening drumbeat of the propaganda, and the sheer lack of sophistication in argument which comes from preaching decade after decade to a convinced and emotionally committed audience, are the major handicaps of Armenian historiography of the diaspora today.

Unlike the unethical Armenian professor/scholar who knows the real truth but deliberately hides it, the Armeni-Lemming firmly and emotionally believes in the writings of pro-Armenians, disregarding everything else as lies or propaganda, even if the source should happen to be from genuinely neutral Western sources or even some Armenians. They have only one goal: to perpetuate the affirmation of their precious "genocide," so much a raison d'etre that out of the rich thousands-year history of the Armenian people, the April 24 "Date of Doom" has pathetically been selected as the overriding historical date to commemorate.

The intensity of dogma and zealotry in the mind of the typical Armeni-Lemming is to such a high degree, he or she would be incapable of conducting a scientific and dispassionate study of events…which is why honest debate would generally constitute an exercise in futility. Of course, not all Armenians are mindless drones… some are capable of overcoming the hatred too many Armenian parents instill in the hearts of their innocent children. These are too few and far between, and even those Armenians who fondly recall their connection with the old country, are afraid to step out of line by speaking publicly. (They know all too well the price that may be paid in the hands of the fanatics among them.) This is why the Armenians come across as monolithic a people as a people could possibly be. (The only way to increase the numbers of the non-lemmings is if the world at large comes to perceive the falseness of Armenian history… just as the world at large ultimately came to believe, despite long-running "cowboy and Indian" American history, that the Indians were hardly the exclusive savages as they were presented for the longest time.)


3) Peternocchio Balakian

Peternocchio Balakian is the generic term that may be applied to the pro-Armenian scholar who persists in presenting false or misrepresentative information as fact, calmly secure in the knowledge that lazy-thinking and/or bigoted Western people will automatically accept whatever is being presented as the truth. Some Peternocchio Balakians may be actual Armeni-Lemmings, genuinely believing that what they are saying is the truth, and everything else is a lie. However, it is to be assumed that since a Peternocchio Balakian has gotten into much more in-depth study than your typical Armeni-Lemming (who is content in mindlessly reading strictly pro-Armenian sources), a Peternocchio Balakian begins to understand the real truth, but does his or her best to cover things up… trying to detract from the wisdom of what an Armenian tells you is not as important as what an Armenian doesn't tell you. Since an Armeni-Lemming is simply and emotionally lost in the world of Armenia-Mania and generally cannot help him or herself, Peternocchio Balakians are assumed to know better and this is why they are guilty of committing first-degree ethocide.

****************************************

The Germans

When I examined the facts from the Armenian perspective, the evidence I found most troubling were from the Germans. After all, the Germans were the allies of the Turks; if the Germans said the Turks were guilty of genocide, that is something worth listening to. Just like the Armenians' allies, the Russians, documented the atrocities of the Armenians, as they went about slicing and dicing innocent Turkish villagers.

However, the difference is, the Russian officers who testified against the Armenians were on the field, and served as genuine eyewitnesses. Almost all the German reports I've seen that incriminated the Turks were far from the action.

A brief background is called for. Did the Germans and the Turks jump into bed together because they were madly in love, or because they needed the services of a hooker?


The fact is, the Germans were no different as far as their Christian European counterparts regarding the disgusting image of the Terrible Turk. Germans were brought up with the same prejudices. The Germans fought wars with the Ottoman Turks through the centuries... few Germans (who never had a chance to meet the mysterious Turks firsthand) regarded the Turks as good human beings.

The picture is from Andrew Wheatcroft's "The Ottomans," which I would recommend heartily to our Armenian friends to get an even-handed view (realizing that any author who writes about the Turks in a way that doesn't regard them as devils would not be deemed objective and possibly in the employ of the Turkish government): "Kladderadatsch, 30 August 1896, shows that the German attitude to the Ottoman was not so very different from that of the other European nations. Once again the Ottomans impale, stab and kill at will — this time in Crete. The cartoon mocks the Ottoman claim that this was a civil war."

So here you have these good, Christian Germans, brainwashed through centuries of how barbaric the Turks are.... how many would manage to erase their prejudices while filing reports?

Johannes Lepsius was a holy man who detested the Turks. He never managed to travel into the heartland of the Ottoman Empire to see things firsthand during the war years, although he begged Ambassador Wangenheim to get Talat Pasha to give permission. Photographer Armin Theophil Wegner, whose works only depict suffering people (and some corpses), in a devastated land littered with suffering people and corpses, is said to have offered "documented proof" of the genocide. I haven't come across any from the Wegner collection that demonstrated a state-sponsored plan for extermination. (And what kind of a German name is "Theophil," anyway?)

Armenian sources sometimes allude to a damning list of comments from Baron von Wangenheim. Wangenheim was just like Ambassador Morgenthau, probably never venturing beyond the city limits of Istanbul. he relied on the reports of consuls and perhaps Armenians. What is being offered are opinions... not facts.

One such consul was Max Erwin von Scheubner Richter; he wrote, "The Armenians of Turkey for all practical purposes have been exterminated." Given that one million Armenians survived from a neutrally figured pre-war population of 1 million to 1.6 million, we can determine exactly how much credibility Herr Richter deserves.

Incidentally, Richter would become a Nazi, managing the SA... and would be shot dead in 1923, during Hitler's premature misstep in challenging the State. Some Armenian scholars would have us believe Richter whispered genocidal thoughts in the future Fuehrer's ear, implanting the notion of the Holocaust. Armenians will grasp at any straw to make the Armenian "Genocide"-Holocaust connection.

On the other side of the coin, General Liman von Sanders, high commander of the German forces, as witness for the defense in Soghoman Tehlirian's trial (i.e., an unfriendly witness), testified: "In the five years I was in Turkey, I never saw an order signed by Talaat against the Armenians..." Since the Germans were, for all intents and purposes, behind the workings of the Ottoman war machine, how is it possible that such a key German general not come across any government-sponsored genocidal order? (Von Sanders further testified he received many telegrams.) If a government decides to commit genocide, they would have to let their local officials to know about such a policy, so that the genocide could be carried out.

The Tehlirian trial seemed pre-determined; there are statements in the transcripts that provided major clues. The broken Germans did not wish to carry the burden of being accused of supervising the policy against the Armenians. There were four or five brilliant Armenian-paid defense lawyers to only one prosecutor, and all the witnesses were unfriendly in a cursory two-day trial where the defendant was allowed to walk free... in this historic case of murder-justification. It seems the Armenian hero, who shot Talat Pasha in the back of the head, was not even tried for bravely shooting and wounding Talat's wife.

Regardless, there is other German testimony offering evidence to the contrary.

Lieutenant General Bronsart Schellendorf was the commander-in-chief of Turkish Land Forces, and he was not allowed to be a witness in the Tehlirian trial. In frustration, he wrote an article which was published in Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung on 24.7.1921, in part stating:

In the Tehlirian case, only the people with poor knowledge about the event were listened as witnesses. The ones who saw the truth were not invited to the trial. Why the German officers, who were on duty in the region were not accepted as witnesses? I want to convey my knowledge about the event via this article since I was not listened as witness . We should take a look at the history in order to understand the accusation of chief vizier Talat who had been killed.

Testimony of other Germans may not be as reliable since the Germans were, after all, allied with the Turks. However, the voice of Schellendorf, a politically unconnected army officer, resonates with sincerity. And he was in the heart of the action. He obviously felt strong enough about the injustice he perceived to take the trouble to tell the world the real side of the story.

In conclusion, because a German offers his opinion that the Armenians were annihilated, in words very likely translated by the fact-twisting Vahakn Dadrian, does not amount to proof... especially when we know the Armenians were far from annihilated. The Germans who said such things were not eyewitnesses, and were affected by the same emotional and mostly concocted reports supplied to Morgenthau's consuls: the missionaries and the Armenians.


ADDENDUM: The Austrians

It wasn't just the Germans who could not let go of their religious and racial bigotry against the Turks, accepting at face value the horror stories of their missionary and Armenian co-religionists. American war correspondent George Abel Schreiner detailed the workings of German bias in this revealing excerpt from “The Craft Sinister,� 1920. The Germans' Austrian allies are also on record for echoing the same "Terrible Turk" sentiments, regarding the Armenian "genocide." While the Germans had enough wars with the Ottoman Turks through the centuries to not have developed the friendliest predisposition, it was likely worked more into the Austrian soul that the Turks were barbarians. The Ottoman Turks, after all, twice stormed the gates of Vienna, leading to the development of the croissant (each time the Austrians bit into the crescent-shaped pastry, it was like "giving it" to the Turks.)

Similar to the opinions of many Germans, Austrian diplomats and others have also implicated the Turks. Prosecutor Vahakn Dadrian has helpfully dug up the opinions of Austrian consuls, Doctors Kwatkiowski and Nadamlenzki, for example. "Opinions," however, can never take the place of cold, hard evidence. In recent times, to stress this point, Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction, precipitating a war, turned out to be nothing more than an "opinion."

On the other hand, there were Austrians (like their German counterparts) who expressed different opinions. Here's one (Austrian Consul in a report submitted to his government, Nikerled Krayblis, Rusya'nin fiark Siyaseti ve Vilayet-i fiarkiyye Mes'elesi [Eastern Policy of Russia and the question of the Eastern Provinces], translated by Habil Adem, Istanbul, 1932, p. 178):

"The outcry and clamor of Armenians and Turks have been persecuting Armenians are nothing but lies. The Turkish government has done nothing evil to Armenians. Perhaps Armenians have planned a revolution taking advantage of the indifference of the government, have armed bands and sent them to mountains, as for the Turks, perhaps they have been trying only to pursue them and put down the uprisings."


Thoughts from NICK:

German and Austrian officials were often prejudiced against Turks and looked at their own broader national post war interests. Don't forget that, prior to the outbreak of war, Germany had been involved in negotiations over the partition of the Ottoman empire in which they would have been substantial beneficiaries. Even in 1915 Germany secretly offered Constantinople to Russia in order to neutralise the eastern front!

network54.com forum, Aug. 1, 2000

*********************************


The Importance of Genocide Resolutions

This essay appeared in response to a question regarding the U.N.'s having recognized the Armenian "Genocide." Afterwards, I wasn't sure whether the U.N. declared such a recognition... since the only ones saying so were the Armenian Assembly of America. Four paragraphs into the essay below, the AAA claimed U.N. recognition on or before the year 2000, and yet U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq declared on October 5th, 2000: "(The) United Nations has not approved or endorsed a
report labeling the Armenian experience as Genocide."


I believe you are asking what is my response to the United Nations' having recognized the Armenian "Genocide." In other words, the U.N. represents the world, and if the world has recognized the Armenian "Genocide," then what more need be said? That proves there must have been a genocide, and there is no need for further discussion.

In order to answer, we cannot simply look at the end result. This is the kind of case where we would need to examine the history of events that led to the end result.

The Armenian Diaspora has spread all over the world. We know the one million Armenians in the United States of America (where probably more Armenians live in the world outside of Armenia itself, the latter of which had 3.4 million people in 2000) and the half a million Armenians in France have contributed to immense Armenian influence in those two particular countries. However, when I look at lands I would have never suspected coming across as pro-Armenian... a local Armenian group residing within that land always emerges from the background, as the driving force behind the pro-Armenian activity.

Here is a description (aaainc.org/genocideintro.htm) from the Armenian Assembly of America (with a $2.5 million budget) of the "Armenian Genocide Reaffirmation":

A growing number of countries and multinational organizations, including the European Parliament and the United Nations, now recognize and reaffirm the Armenian Genocide as historical fact. In 1995 the Russian parliament adopted a resolution on the Armenian Genocide; in 1996 the Canadian House of Commons and the Greek Parliament also adopted similar resolutions. The Lebanese Chamber of Deputies followed in 1997 and in 1998 the Belgian Senate, French National Assembly and the Council of Europe all passed resolutions that reaffirmed the Armenian Genocide. Now members of U.S. House of Representatives are working diligently to ensure Congressional Affirmation of the Armenian Genocide in the year 2000.


(This particular resolution, out of the many that have been introduced over the years in the U.S. Congress, was brought by Republican James Rogan, representing the 25,000 potential Armenian-American voters from his Californian district, in a bid to help Rep. Rogan's uphill fight for re-election. The resolution almost passed, until President Bill Clinton wisely nipped it in the bud... keeping America's national interests in mind.)

And here is a list (to 1998) of all the many countires who have mindlessly adopted resolutions to support the Armenian "Genocide," courtesy of a web site from Armenian friends in Greece: virtuals.compulink.gr/armen-yth/pages/aguk.htm

On this list, I especially enjoyed the neutral ones from 13 June 1997 — The Association of Genocide Scholars ... and from 22 April 1998 — The National Assembly of the Republic of Nagorno Karabagh. Russia, in particular, should be ashamed for hopping on this bandwagon. Ultimately, the Armenians must accept their own responsibility for their own actions that led to the relocation policy in 1915... however, the Russians (and the British, to a lesser extent) had a huge part to play in using the Armenians as pawns. Russia played a key role in emboldening the Armenians to systematically massacre 500,000-600,000 Turks/Muslims, out of the over 2.5 million who died from all wartime causes.


Let's examine the anatomy of these resolutions. Case study: America.

The Armenian lobby in the United States has been resoundingly successful. The main reason: they play the ethnic race/Christian vs. Muslim cards expertly well. No "Muslim" lobby of any power exists to effectively refute and oppose them, and the Armenians know how to exploit this inequity.

Just one example of their success: they actually managed to get the U.S. Congress to cut foreign aid to Azerbaijan after the Armenians' sneak, unprovoked attack on Azerbaijan in 1992. The Armenian soldiers, true to their ways, swooped down on the citizenry, and murdered many in the most inhumane of ways (The Armenian-friendly Boston Globe reported in November 21, 1993: What we see now is a systematic destruction of every village in their way, said one senior US official. It’s one of the most disgusting things we’ve seen).... taking at least 20% of Azerbaijan's territory, and driving a million human beings from their homes. Yet, cowardly/self-serving and ignorant U.S. Congressmen decided to penalize Azerbaijan.

And it's not only because Armenia claims to be Christian like the United States, while Azerbaijan is Muslim. Muslim Azerbaijan has no real lobby in America, but the well-financed Armenian-American lobby has plenty of greenbacks to fill the pockets of unprincipled politicians.

Here's what Samuel Weems said, in 2002:

The Armenians have perhaps 40-50 full time professionals in Washington DC doing nothing but working each and every day to undercut Turkey and Azerbaijan and promote themselves for more foreign aid taxpayer funding. Turkish Americans have - 0- staff and office working for them in Washington DC. The Turks really should do more to protect themselves. All they have to do is tell truth! Here is an eye-opening calculation for you: Armenians, in the last 10 years, have probably spent about 14 million dollars to support all the political candidates that they did. When those candidates got elected, Armenia got 1.4 billion dollars in the same 10 years as US Foreign Aid. That is, for every one dollar Armenian Americans "invested", they got $100 back in US Aid to Armenia! 100 to 1 return! This is a better return than Las Vegas casinos! (smiles) Wake up Turkish Americans!. Get involved!

Now, pro-Armenians may not like Sam Weems, but the only relevant matter is whether these facts and figures are correct.


Here is an Armenian Assembly of America page that lends evidence to how frightened Americans should be, demonstrating the lack of objectivity and limited intellectual capacity of their elected political leaders (of course, there are those, like Frank Baloney Jr... others call him Frank Pallone, Jr. ... who might well have been bought by the Armenians):

aaainc.org/record/house_statements01.htm

Notice how almost all are human rubber-stamps, saying exactly what they've been told, parroting what Armenian-Americans have been moaning about for a century and longer, such as how the Terrible Turk massacred 1.5 million of their Christian forefathers. If they haven't been bought, these people are either Christian sympathizers, or simply naive... they've been hearing a big lie all their lives, and they firmly believe it, by now.


(I would have loved to hear how Rep. Adam Schiff of California handled his testimony of rattling off an endless list of Armenian victims' names, for dramatic effect. I wonder if he managed, without getting tongue-tied. Rep. Schiff, by the way, was James Rogan's Democratic opponent in the election Rogan hoped to salvage by introducing the genocide resolution. The one thing both men had in common was kissing Armenian buttocks.)

I don't have the time to check the exact figures now, but in the case of the world's second most Armenian-loving country, France (I can't be sure, but perhaps the order of Armenian-loving countries would work out thus: 1. America 2. France 3. Armenia), their Armenian genocide resolution passed when only about one-tenth -- a "skeleton crew" -- of the Assembly people were present. The next time the fuller body of representatives came in for a full day's work, they didn't dare to veto what went on before. There are so many powerful Armenians in France, after all. It's the country where Boghos Nubar began the powerful Armenian organization (the AGBU), that today has an annual budget of 27 million dollars. This is only one of many powerful Armenian organizations throughout the world, albeit likely among the better financed.


Throughout the world, Armenians have been successful in getting similar resolutions adopted. Many are countries where Turkey is practically a non-entity. It doesn't help that Turkey has no real friends in the world. Even those friends like the United States are only friendly when Turkey acts like a vassal state... as proven earlier in 2003. Every wonderful thing Turkey has done over the years supporting America's interests is quickly forgotten, the moment Turkey steps out of line. (And this particular example was probably the first time Turkey stepped out of line, in U.S.-Turkish relations.)

It was the United States that put an embargo on Turkey after the Cyprus intervention. It didn't matter that the Greeks broke every rule in the book in years past, violating all the agreements... it didn't matter that Turkish Cypriots were getting massacred in years past, and had the plan to unite with Greece succeeded, every Turkish Cypriot would have been massacred (as Nicos Sampson, the leader, admitted years later in a Feb. 26, 1981 interview with the Greek newspaper, Eleftherotipia), and it didn't matter what Turkey did was legal, as even an Athens court admitted in 1979. No nation has recognized the validity of Northern Cyprus. (I remember reading Bangladesh did, for at least a while..? And North Korea..!)

So if Armenians have established themselves all over the world and are active on this issue, of course they will succeed in getting their resolutions passed... all over the world. Especially if they are wealthy. The usually apathetic and ignorant Turks who are in these countries are mainly in their own little worlds, and the playing field is wide open for the Armenians.

Let's put aside the fact that "Resolutions" are worthless and have no legal meaning. These "Resolutions" merely express the thoughts of the officials who vote for them. The sneaky Armenian plan all these years has been to get these resolutions passed, just so they can say, see. The world agrees with us. Next step: reparations and land.

(Of course, the Treaty of Gumru that was signed on December 2, 1920 between the young Turkish government and the Armenian Republic declared there shall be no reparations, and we all know Armenia would never dream of breaking her word. This treaty also gave a provision to allow the relocated Armenians to return to their lands within one year. By contrast, according to an addendum to Dr. Dennis Papazian's amazing "What Every Armenian Should Know," "Russia... forbade Armenian refugees...from returning to their lands, which the Russian armies had overrun during the war." Armenians may want to read stories of William Saroyan, such as Antranik of Armenia — to get the perspective the real enemy of the Armenians were not the Turks, but the Russians.)

So let's get to the United Nations' recognition of the Armenian "Genocide." The U.N. is also a political body. if Turkey has no friends in the world, and if the Armenians have sneakily succeeded in getting many countries to adopt these resolutions, how do you think the representatives of these countries are going to vote? Are they going to go against the resolutions their home countries have already passed? Those countries that the Armenians haven't gotten around to passing resolutions yet... the ones that have no affinity for Turkey... how do you think they're going to vote? Why, everybody is saying there is an Armenian genocide, so there must have been one. Is anybody really going to take the time to study this issue?

"If you tell a lie big enough and often enough and no one challenges you - a great number of people will believe the lie no matter how big it is."

If one looks to prove the Armenian "Genocide," it won't do to point to people's opinions formed exclusively by distorted Armenian history, or who have ulterior motives. People of honor and integrity... genuine truth-seekers... have only one place to look: the facts of OBJECTIVE history.

Do most Western sources that lend evidence... like Morgenthau, foreign consuls, Bryce, the missionaries, Lepsius, the N.Y. Times... have conflicts of interest? Yes, they do. Do most Western sources that lend counter-evidence have conflicts of interest? Westerners who have grown up being told the Turks were cruel savages? No, they don't. Did the "Nuremberg" of WWI, the Malta Tribunal, find the Turks innocent... after nearly two-and-one-half years of desperately searching all documents within reach in Allied-occupied Istanbul (and in other countries), employing a crack team of Armenian researchers? Yes, it did. (Remember, the British could have conducted a mock trial in 1919 and gotten the matter over with as they originally planned.... just like the 1919 Ottoman kangaroo courts. Keep that in mind when you come across Armenian reasons to discredit the Malta Tribunal.)

I am a truth-seeker... and I hope you are, too. I don't care what the Turkish government says, I don't care what any Turk says... I make up my own mind for myself. The moment I run into GENUINE proof, I would be the first to say... yes, there was an Ottoman government sponsored plan to exterminate the Armenian people. Why not? The government in charge, after all, was overturned by the present Turkish government in charge. I owe no allegiance to the Ottoman government. In fact, ultimately, I owe no allegiance to anybody or any entity, but the principles of truth and honor. I love my country, but if America does something clearly wrong, you would not find me defending what America has done. Definitely no less would apply to the nation of Turkey.

© Holdwater
tallarmeniantale.com/hold-glossary.htm
hold-germans.htm
hold-resolution.htm