Video - Ex-Muslim scholar and Islamic lecturer warns: "Islam wants to dominate."

Source here.

Mandatory music classes & Canadian Anthem rejected by some Muslim parents in Canada: Music is Haram.

Mandatory music classes rejected by some Muslim parents in Canada: Music is haram. (GM).

When music class begins this week at Toronto’s Donwood Park elementary school, Mohammad Nouman Dasu will send a family member to collect his three young children. 

They will go home for an hour rather than sing and play instruments – a mandatory part of the Ontario curriculum he believes violates his Muslim faith.

The Scarborough school and the Toronto District School Board originally had offered an accommodation – suggesting students could just clap their hands in place of playing instruments or listen to acapella versions of O Canada – but not a full exemption from the class.

After a bitter three-year fight, however, Mr. Dasu felt he had no other option but to bring his kids home.

According to documents ob-tained by The Globe and Mail, some parents insist they cannot allow their children to be in the same room where musical instruments are being played. Mr. Dasu, a Koran teacher who sometimes leads prayers at Scarborough’s Jame Abu Bakr Siddique mosque, says he has led the fight on behalf of parents. He has consulted with national Islamic bodies, and requested a letter from the leader of his mosque.

“We here believe that music is haram [forbidden]. We can neither listen to it, nor can we play a role in it,” said the mosque’s imam, Kasim Ingar.

Conceding that Muslims have to adjust when they send their kids to public school, he suggested that some matters, such as teaching music, are beyond debate.

“We do not compromise with anyone on the clear-cut orders and principles conveyed by the Prophet,” said Mr. Ingar, who also leads the Scarborough Muslim Association.

Within Islam, the question of whether Muslims are banned from music is divisive and nuanced. S

Hmmm......So everyone covers their ears when the Iranian national anthem is played? Read the full story here.

Gay couple ‘humiliated’ by Emirates staff in Dubai.

Gay couple ‘humiliated’ by Emirates staff in Dubai. (Independent).

A British gay couple were allegedly humiliated by Emirates staff at Dubai airport after being asked if they were brothers.

Lee Charlton, 42, from Manchester claims Emirates check-in staff laughed at him and his partner when they confirmed they were a couple while travelling from Dubai to Durban with their son Kieran.


According to Charleston, a woman working behind the check-in counter at Dubai airport gave him “quizzical looks” and summoned her manager after asking him whether either Jason or Kieran were his brothers.

The couple and their son were then taken to an airport back room and left there for two hours and told that their documentation would not allow them to enter South Africa. They nearly missed their connecting flight and were forced to rush across the large airport to catch it just in time, despite originally having a three-hour stop over.

The 42-year-old posted the complaint on his Facebook page, saying, “I am really amazed at the small mindedness of your handling team in Dubai. I have not felt so embarrassed like this because of my sexuality since I was younger. You really need to give culture training to your teams as Dubai is one of the biggest airports in the world and gay people who have adopted will become more frequent.”

“I could understand this with ground staff who do not work for Emirates but these were your handling staff. Please do something with this email I would be happy to help as I would never want anyone else to go through the same experience. It isn’t nice,” he added.

Emirates replied to the complaint, saying, “Hi Lee, we’re sorry to hear you feel this way. We’ll highlight your feedback to our Airport Service team for an internal review. Thanks.”

Homosexuality is illegal in Dubai and gay people have been handed jail sentences of up to two years in the past.

Video - Islam and homosexuality for Dummies.

This is absolute proof, that Islam is NOT a "religion of peace"...https://t.co/gecwhKiBBH

— Shellie Correia (@shelliecorreia) June 14, 2016

HT And Source: 

I'm hoping this is a hoax. Otherwise it's terrifying. https://t.co/8wo1cJYZ1R

— Lorrie Goldstein (@sunlorrie) June 15, 2016

I did some research last night and I'm satisfied it's real. https://t.co/SkBegec3nb

— Lorrie Goldstein (@sunlorrie) June 15, 2016

Video - Al-Azhar Professor Suad Saleh: In a Legitimate War, Muslims Can Capture Slavegirls and Have Sex with Them

Video - Egyptian TV Host Duaa Salah Appears with "Battered" Face to Protest Violence against Women.

Is Canada’s new Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs an Islamist?

Source

Is Canada’s new Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs an Islamist? By Daniel Pipes.

Ezra Levant gives five instances of Alghabra's Islamist-leaning record at the Western Standard's blog:

1. Alghabra has condemned CanWest newspapers for labeling groups like Hamas and Hezbollah "terrorist" groups;
2. Alghabra has welcomed al-Jazeera to Canada and railed against any restrictions on it, but condemned the CRTC for allowing the "abusive" Fox News Channel in;
3. In the wake of the Arab riots at Concordia that shut down a speech by former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Alghabra had the temerity to blame Jewish students for silencing campus discussions, and supported an Arab conference on campus whose stated mission was the elimination of Israel;
4. Alghabra has called for the total abolition of Canada's anti-terrorism laws.

There is also a sixth point, namely Alghabra's support for the Canadian government applying Shari'a law, a major issue in Ontario over the past two years. His backing for this initiative comes out in an interview with Alghabra in Al Mughtarib, a Canadian weekly, dated Dec. 14. (This article is not on the Al Mughtarib website; I was alerted to it by a comment on this entry by a reader named "hr" who sent me a scan of the Arabic text.) In reply to a question about the Shari'a, Alghabra replies:

Unfortunately, the majority of [Canadian] Muslims remained silent during the research of this law and abandoned the field to a dissenting minority [of Muslims] which had a louder voice. As a result, this plan ended in failure. The problem was not a stand taken [by non-Muslims] against Muslims, but it was we [Muslims] who were divided among ourselves and disunited in our ranks.

In an interview with the Jewish Tribune, Alghabra made a series of statements regarding the Middle East that, in his interviewer's understated words, "could be a cause for concern."

• Alghabra claimed he has "always spoken out against extremism and violence against civilians," but when asked specifically to denounce suicide bombers, he claimed that he was being "trapped" and refused comment.
• What about Hamas, which is committed to Israel's destruction? "I don't believe that Hamas wants the elimination of Israel."
• He wants Israel completely to return to its June 4, 1967, "in accordance with [United Nations] Resolution 242." Reminded that 242 calls on Israel to withdraw from "territories," not "all territories" gained in the Six Day War, Alghabra insisted that: "242 means all territories."
• Asked whether his views on the Middle East represent Liberal Party policy, Alghabra replied, "Yes."

According to the Al Jezeera News Service, Omar Alghabra is a “long-time personal friend” to Prime Minister Trudeau. Additionally, Mr Alghabra is stated to have been able to “recruit more than 12,000 volunteers across the country to work for Trudeau’s campaign.”

Israel's National news wonders......A sign of the true Trudeau?


Given Alghabra's past, many are raising concerns that his appointment to an office deciding foreign policy may indicate the line Trudeau intends to follow.

"Normally, in politics, Alghabra is someone you keep far away from you. But Trudeau keeps Alghabra very close – he’s been the key to unlocking the anti-Israel vote, the anti-Semitic vote, the pro-Hamas vote, and the pro-sharia vote." said Ezra Levent.

  Hmmm...........It seems for sure that Israel just lost another Ally and gained a new 'enemy'. Read the full story here, More here  And Here at Aretz Sheva.

Muslim scholar proposes new interpretation of Islam as solution in the fight against Islamic State jihadists.

Muslim scholar proposes new interpretation of Islam as solution in the fight against Islamic State jihadists .(AN).

Fighting the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq (ISIS) group with the Qurʼān is possible. Only the Muslim Holy Book, not politics or sociology, can offer a real response to radical Islam and jihadi  movements like ISIS, which use shūrās as a pretext and justification for their actions, this according to Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im, a Muslim scholar.

A professor of law in the United States originally from Sudan, Dr An-Na'im has a deep knowledge of Islamic law. For him, the way to reform and opposition to extremist and fanatical movements who use the Holy Book to justify their actions lies in Qurʼān itself, in its oldest verses, dating back to Muhammad’s time in Makkah.

The original version of the article that follows was published in The Conversation, an independent news platform sourced from the academic and research community.

The media coverage of the terrorist atrocities of Friday November 13 in Paris would seem to promote an almost mythical image of the Islamic State (ISIS). What humanity needs, however, is to demystify ISIS as a criminal organization. And that need is particularly important in my community – the Muslim community.

The vast majority of Muslims almost certainly (we do not have exact figures) feel moral revulsion and outrage about the violence perpetrated by ISIS. Indeed, Egypt’s top Sunni cleric, to name just one example, was quick to denounce the perpetrators of Friday’s “hideous and hateful” attacks.
However, the truth of the matter is that ISIS leaders and supporters can and do draw on a wealth of scriptural and historical sources to justify their actions.

Traditional interpretations of Sharia, or Islamic law, approved aggressive jihad to propagate Islam. They permitted the killing of captive enemy men. They allowed Jihadis to enslave enemy women and children, as ISIS did with the Yazidi women in Syria.

I am a Muslim scholar of Sharia. It is my contention that ISIS' claim of Islamic legitimacy can be countered only by a viable alternative interpretation of Islamic law.

Consensus leading to deadlock

The key to understanding the role of Islam in politics is that there is no one authoritative entity that can establish or change Sharia doctrine for Muslims on any subject.

There is no equivalent of the Vatican and papal infallibility. How Sharia is interpreted by the many different communities of Muslims (from Sunni and Shia to Sufi and Salafi) is, at base, the product of an intergenerational consensus of the scholars and leaders of each community.

Islamic belief and practice is fundamentally individual and voluntary in its nature. A Muslim cannot be accountable for the views and actions of others.

One positive consequence of this absence of any one religious authority is the fact that it is possible to contest and reinterpret Sharia principles.

On the negative side, however, any Muslim can make any claim about Sharia if he or she can persuade a critical mass of Muslims to accept it.

One example of this is how Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini used the doctrine of “wilayat al-faqih” (or guardianship of the jurist) to claim the authority to launch the Islamic Republic of Iran in 1979.

This was controversial because in doing so, he went against the consensus that authority for such a decision resided in the person of the 12th and last “living” Shia Imam, who disappeared (but did not die) in 874 and, it is believed, will reappear at the end of time as al-Mahdi.

A more recent example is the creation of ISIS by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and his self-appointment as Caliph or successor of the Prophet Muhammed, divinely charged with resurrecting a state that ended 1,400 years ago.

Things changed in the 10th century

For the first 300 years of its existence, Islamic thought can be characterized as dynamic and creative, with differing interpretations of the scriptures being discussed and debated among communities and generations. Ijtihad, or independent juridical reasoning, was explicitly endorsed by the Prophet Muhammed.

Some modern Muslims, like the Sisters in Islam organization in Malaysia, are exercising ijtihad today to promote the human rights of women from an Islamic perspective. To those, then, who accept the Sisters' interpretation, women are accorded equal rights according to Sharia. But the Sisters and others like them are in a minority.

By the 10th century, a highly sophisticated body of Sharia principles, methodologies and schools of thought had taken shape and put down roots among Muslim communities across the ancient world, from West Africa to Southeast Asia. This phenomenon came to be known as “closing the Gate of Ijtihad,” to indicate that there is no theological space for new creative juridical thinking.

There was, of course, no “Gate of Ijtihad” to be closed, and nobody had the authority to close the gate even if one had existed. The metaphor, however, highlighted the contrast between the cultivation of diversity in the first three centuries of Sharia and the stalemate and rigidity of the study of Islamic law since then.

The “silver lining” of ISIS is that it is forcing Muslims to confront the consequences of archaic interpretations of aggressive jihad.

Moving from Mecca to Medina

The Prophet Muhammad was born and raised in Mecca, a town in western Arabia, where he proclaimed Islam in AD 610. In AD 622, he had to move with a small group of his early followers to Medina, another town in Western Arabia, in order to escape persecution and threats to his life.

This migration not only affected where the revelations were made to the prophet – a fact that is noted in the Quran. It also marked a shift in the content of the Quran.

ISIS' harsh and regressive interpretation of Sharia draws on the Quran of Medina, which repeatedly instructed Muslims to support each other and to separate themselves from non-Muslims.

For example, in verse 3:28 (and 4:144, 8:72-73, 9:23, 71 and 60:1M), Muslims are prohibited from taking unbelievers (pagan or polytheist) as friends and supporters. Instead, they are instructed to look to other Muslims for friendship and support.

The whole of Chapter 9 – which is among the last revelations – categorically sanctions and authorizes aggressive jihad against all non-Muslims, including People of the Book or Christians and Jews (verse 9:29).

Yes, the term jihad is used in the Quran* to mean nonviolent efforts to propagate Islam (see verses 29:8, 31:15 and 47:31). But that does not change the fact that the same term was also used to mean aggressive war to propagate Islam.

This latter interpretation was, in fact, sanctioned by the actions and explicit instructions of the prophet himself, and by his most senior followers, who subsequently became his first four successors and the rulers or Caliphs of Medina.

Legitimate or illegitimate?

A related difficulty in this whole discussion is that according to Sharia, jihad can only be launched by a legitimate state authority.

ISIS claims to have Islamic legitimacy, but what is the basis of that secretive claim? Who nominated them, and why and how should the Caliph of ISIS have authority over the global Muslim community?

Since this authority is based on an entirely open and free process of individual choice, ISIS’ claim may succeed to the extent it is supported by a critical mass of Muslims.

The danger is that passive acquiescence can be used by ISIS leaders as evidence of positive support.
After all, only a handful of Muslim majority states  – and then only under Western leadership – have shown willingness to resist the military expansion of ISIS.

Meanwhile, the masses of Muslims and their community leaders are not – tellingly – turning to Sharia to justify their opposition to ISIS claims. Many Muslims have condemned ISIS for moral or political reasons, but this, likely, is discredited among ISIS supporters as “Western” reasoning.

An alternative view

What then is needed is an alternative view of Sharia, one that argues that the scriptural sources that ISIS relies on must be seen in their wider historical context.

These principles, in other words, may have been relevant and applicable 1,400 years ago, when war – wherever it was being waged in the world – was much more harsh than it is now. Exclusive Muslim solidarity (wala’) then was essential for the survival of the community and success of their mission.
But today, the opposite is true.

Modern international law as stated in Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations of 1945 (a universally binding treaty) affirms equal sovereignty of all states regardless of religious belief, and prohibits the acquisition of territory through aggressive war.

While these principles have been violated by the major powers – recent examples include the US/UK invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the Russian invasion of the Ukraine in 2014 – it is impossible for any state, including those with a Muslim majority, to accept being forced into a self-proclaimed Islamic state, as ISIS claims to have an Islamic mandate to do.

But for an alternative view of Sharia to emerge and take root through modern consensus, Muslims must first acknowledge and confront the problem of having acquiesced to a traditional interpretation of Sharia and ignored alternatives that would condemn ISIS as un-Islamic.

One place to start is with the writing of the Sudanese religious thinker Ustadh Mahmoud Mohamed Taha, who proposed repudiating the specific principles of Sharia authorizing aggressive jihad, slavery and subordination of women and non-Muslims by relying on the earlier revelations from Mecca.

For example, verse 16:125 says: “Propagate the path of your Lord in wisdom and peaceable advice, and argue with them in a kind manner” (see also verses 17:70, 49:13 and 88:21-22).

As Taha explained in his book The Second Message of Islam, the Sharia principles based on the Medina revelations came about in response to the historical conditions of seventh-century Arabia.
Taha argued that today it is the earlier message of Islam based on the Mecca revelations that is applicable because humanity is ready to live up to those standards.

Despite – or perhaps because of – the desperate need for alternatives to traditional Sharia interpretations, Taha was executed for apostasy in Sudan in 1985, and his books in Arabic continue to be banned in most Arab countries.

And ISIS continues to recruit.

The self-proclaimed Islamic State can survive only by fighting a permanent war. It is my contention that it will either implode or collapse in a total civil war because it has no viable political system for peaceful administration or transfer of power.

But whenever it collapses and for whatever cause, the world can only expect a new ISIS to emerge every time one disappears until we Muslims are able to discuss openly the deadlock in reforming Sharia.


* Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im, a Muslim originally from Sudan, teaches at the Emory University School of Law, Atlanta, and is an expert in human rights, Islamic law and international law.

*After the Qur'an*, the hadith (reports on the sayings and acts of the prophet) is the second most important source of Islamic law (Shari'a). In hadith collections, jihad means armed action; for example, the 199 references to jihad in the most standard collection of hadith, Sahih al-Bukhari, all assume that jihad means warfare.7 More broadly, Bernard Lewis finds that "the overwhelming majority of classical theologians, jurists, and traditionalists [i.e., specialists in the hadith] . . . understood the obligation of jihad in a military sense."8
http://www.meforum.org/357/what-does-jihad-mean

Annual Brussels Muslim Fair in Brussels Draws as usual 'Global Muslim Brotherhood'.

By the way nice zabiba burn.

Annual Brussels Muslim Fair in Brussels Draws as usual 'Global Muslim Brotherhood'. HT: globalMBwatch.

Turkish media is reporting that this year’s annual Muslim Fair in Brussels has attracted thousands of visitors. According to the report:

A fair organized by Muslims in Belgian capital Brussels has attracted thousands of visitors at its stands mainly theming clothes, accessories, halal food and natural cosmetics as well as Rabia movement (a civil movement protesting against the military coup in Egypt) and resistance against Syria’s brutal regime. Organizers think the fair will reach a total visitors number of 25 thousand by the end of tomorrow, the final day of the fair.

The Muslim Fair aiming the struggle against Islamaphobia and intercultural dialogue is being held at Brussels’s historic Tour & Taxi Cultural Centre.

The fair is also an opportunity for the visitors to meet and listen to speeches from intellectuals and scholars from Europe and the Arab world including Saudi Arabia, Morocco and Sudan on several topics like reform in Islam, refugee crisis in Europe, message of the Quran.

The 4-day fair was organised by the League of Muslims in Belgium in collaboration with Gedis Company which is based in Paris.

Islamic Relief, a humanitarian organization, has established a refugee tent to draw attention to the living conditions of Syrian refugees at camps. A Palestinian humanitarian organization has opened a stand to receive donations for Palestinians in need. They are running a campaign for Gazan children with the motto "Do you want to change the life of a Gazan child?" The organization also carries out campaigns for Palestinians living in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon.

The program for this year’s Fair indicates that numerous Muslim Brotherhood figures were scheduled to speak including:

• Abdallah Ben Mansour (President of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe)

• Issam El Bashir (Sudanese, European Council for Fatwa and Research)

• Hassan Iquioussen (leader in the Union des Organisations Islamiques de France)

Also scheduled to speak were two Salafi figures-  Abdullah al Mosleh,  Chairman of the International Commission on Scientific Signs in Qur’an & Sunnah in Makkah and Omar Abdelkafy, an Egyptian cleric who recently made controversial remarks about the 911 attacks. Read the full story and more on the Muslim Brotherhood here.

Reopening Hagia Sophia to prayers is my dream, Turkish tourism minister says.

Hagio Sophia before the Turkish invasion.

Reopening 'Stolen' Hagia Sophia to prayers is my dream, Turkish tourism minister says. (HD).

Culture and Tourism Minister Yalçın Topçu has said he wished for the Hagia Sophia museum in Istanbul to be reopened to prayers for Muslims.

“Opening the Hagia Sophia to prayers [for Muslims] is my personal dream, my goal, my ambition. Although there are several debates over its judicial status, the issue is more of a political debate,” said Topçu, who was nominated as culture and tourism minister in the interim government by Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu ahead of the snap polls scheduled for Nov. 1.

Topçu, the former chair of the Islamist-nationalist Great Union Party (BBP), was a surprising name in the new cabinet.

“There is an international dimension too, because the symbolic meaning of the Hagia Sophia is great. The final decision will be given by this nation rather than the world. A referendum might be the most serious solution,” he said.

He also said demands for the museum to become a mosque again have been reflected as a “radical demand” by the media. Hmmmm......With over 85,000 mosques they're bound to be one short.Read the full story here.

Related: 2013: 17,000 new mosques built under Erdogan Some 17,000 new mosques have been built during Turkish Premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan's 10 years of leadership, Milliyet reports. In the same period the amount of public schools has remained at 32,000 while the number of mosques has jumped from 76,000 to 93,000. Turkey's secular opposition has accused Erdogan of having a ''secret plan'' to re-Islamisize the nation.

The Turks entered WW1 with the intention of clearing Anatolia of Christians, they didn't react to an Armenian revolt.

The Turks entered WW1 with the intention of clearing Anatolia of Christians, they didn't react to an Armenian revolt. By Kyle W. Orton.

The controversy over the 1915-17 massacres of Armenian Christians by the Ottoman Empire is whether these acts constitute genocide. Those who say they don’t are not the equivalent of Holocaust-deniers in that while some minimize the figures of the slain, they do not deny that the massacres happened; what they deny is that the massacres reach the legal definition of genocide. Their case is based on three interlinked arguments:

Unlike the Nazi Holocaust when a defenceless population was murdered only for its identity, the Armenians were engaged in a massive armed revolt, and this is why the Ottoman government decided to deport them.

The intent of the Ottomans was not massacre but the removal of the Armenians, who had sided with one foreign invading power (Russia) and who were showing signs of collaborating with another (Britain), from the militarily sensitive areas as Turkey suffered a two-front invasion in early 1915.

While terrible massacres, plus starvation and the cold, took maybe a million lives during the deportations, when the Armenians reached their destinations in Syria and Iraq, which were also part of the Ottoman Empire, they were well-treated and allowed to rebuild their lives, which would not have been the case had the Ottomans intended their destruction.

Taner Akcam’s A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility presents evidence to undermine every one of these arguments.

The Armenian genocide is marked on April 24, the day in 1915 several Armenian notables in Istanbul were arrested. This date fits rather well with the Turkish narrative.


This timeline, however, misses several key events which show that the deportations were not a reactive policy but a key strategic intention of the Ottomans in entering the Great War—and Istanbul did deliberately enter the war, despite much myth-making to this day that Turkey was forced into it. 

The CUP sought the restoration of Ottoman glory, a key component of which was the removal of the Christians from Anatolia, and thought this could be had by war.

The cancellation of the Treaty of Yenikoy, signed on February 8, 1914, under Russian pressure, which called for administrative reforms, namely autonomy, for the Ottoman Christians, and called for an international intervention if the reforms were not implemented, was one of the first acts after the Ottoman declaration of war. With the Armenian reform agreement dead, the legal basis for international interference in the Ottoman realm went with it.

Later Istanbul would also cancel the 1878 Berlin Treaty—the other instrument that dealt with the Armenian Question—and also withdrew from the 1856 Paris Treaty, which ended the Crimean War and inducted the Ottoman Empire into the “family of Europe,” the realm where international law applied, and the London Declaration of 1871. The cancellation of these three treaties freed the Ottomans from all international legal restraints on their behaviour and all legal right for other States to intervene in their internal affairs.

The massacres had stopped by the summer of 1917, though the destruction of Armenian property had not.

There is a significant argument over how many Armenians there were in pre-war Turkey—the Armenian Church says 2.1 million; the Turks say 1.3 million. What is known for sure is that 600,000 Armenians were alive after 1918—thus 600,000 to 1.5 million Armenians were killed, with 150,000-to-200,000 of them having survived the deportations. The number of Armenian women and children taken into servitude or converted within Muslim families is impossible to estimate. Hmmmm.....What is clear is 1. It was carefully & Methodically  planned; 2. It were crimes against Humanity, perpetrated by the Ottomans. Read the full story here.

'Islamist' Turkey - Unique Byzantium 12Th century Hagia Sophia church in Enez to be 'renovated' in to mosque.

As Pres Obama would say 'You (Turks) did not build that!'

'Islamist' Turkey - 12Th century Hagia Sophia church in Enez to be 'renovated' in to mosque. (HD).

A ruined Hagia Sophia dating back to the 12th century in the western border province of Edirne will be renovated as a mosque, despite former statements made about the possibility of restoring it as a museum.

Following the conversion of two Hagia Sophia into museums, which were initially built as churches and then turned into mosques and, subsequently, museums, the third Hagia Sophia in Edirne’s Enez district will be reconverted into a mosque, according to Foundations General Director Adnan Ertem, despite previous debates on turning it into a museum after reconstruction.

Speaking to state-run Anadolu Agency, Ertem said the Edirne Culture Assets Protection Regional Board approved the reconstruction project of the structure, which he called a “mosque” during the interview.

Ertem said the project would start as soon as possible, adding that the Hagia Sophia has been taken into the Foundations General Directorate’s investment program.

Explaining why it should be re-opened as a mosque, Erdem said the building was a “sanctuary that was consecrated as a mosque.”

“It is a foundation that can be put into service in line with its foundational charter. Thus its function will be preserved,” said Ertem.


Enez’s Hagia Sophia is located inside the ancient city of Ainos and although there are no records, it is thought to date back to the 12th century. It is located along the border with Greece and stationed on top of a hill seen from all around.

The district governor of Enez, Fatih Baysal, said in 2012 the usage of the structure as a mosque or not was a matter to be decided after the renovation.

“But even if it is used as a museum or a mosque, this place really needs to be [opened],” said Baysal.

Enez Mayor Abdullah Bostancı said the structure would have similar properties to the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul.

The main Hagia Sophia, which has been a museum since 1935, was built in the fourth century and converted into a mosque, when Mehmet the Conqueror took Istanbul in 1453.

Hagia Sophia of Enez

In Enez, on the Gulf of Saros near the Greek border, there are the ruins of the sea facing, sixth century Hagia Sophia church, which was used as a mosque until the mid-1960s. Although the exact construction date of the Hagia Sophia of Enez, also known as Fatih Mosque, is unknown, it is considered to be representative of mid-Byzantine architecture styles.

The church, which was converted into a mosque after the 1456 capture of Enez by Sultan Mehmet II is located at the highest point of the Enez castle. The Hagia Sophia of Enez also offers a great view of Enez Lakes, Maritsa River and Marmara Sea. Hmmmm....The 'Islamist' leadership of Turkey thinks we are idiots, it's pretty obvious the real 'target' is the Istanbul Haga Sophia.

More on this unique Byzantium 12Th century church can be read here. (See Below).

Muslim Brotherhood 'Godfather' Qaradawi Joins US MB Supporting 'Islamist' Turkey On 100 Y. Armenian Genocide.

Muslim Brotherhood 'Godfather' Qaradawi Joins US MB Supporting 'Islamist' Turkey On 100th Anniversary Of Armenian Genocide. (GMBR).

Turkish media is reporting that Global Muslim Brotherhood leader Youssef Qaradawi has joined the US Muslim Brotherhood in declaring his support for Turkey on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the genocide of Armenians at the hands of the Turks during World War I. According a Daily Sabah report:

April 28, 2015 Prominent Muslim scholar Youssef al-Qaradawi has declared support for Turkey against “vicious claims” related to the events of 1915. 

“There is an increasingly vicious campaign by some countries to pressure Turkey to take responsibility for the alleged Armenian genocide in 1915,” al-Qaradawi, the Qatar-based chief of the International Union for Muslim Scholars, said in a statement on Monday. 

“Attempts to distort history by exaggerating the number of Armenians killed in the 1915 incidents while downplaying the Ottoman fatalities will not bring Turkey’s supporters to succumb to these campaigns,” he said. 

“History has not forgotten the victims of the Crusades, in which European armies committed the most brutal killings in Jerusalem and the Levant.” Read the rest here.

Hmmm......Qaradawi has a 'history' of covering up the Armenian Genocide and Turkey's role in it. Read the full story here.

Armenian Church launching lawsuit in Turkey to reclaim stolen church/lands.

Armenian Church launching lawsuit in Turkey to reclaim stolen church/lands. (Anca).

WHAT: Press conference announcing lawsuit filed in the Turkish Constitutional Court on April 28th calling for the return of a historical Christian Armenian church and monastery.

WHERE/WHEN:

Wednesday, April 29, 2015, 1:00 pm - Press Conference National Press Club, Lisagor Room 529 14th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20045

WHO:

-- Archbishop Oshagan Choloyan, Prelate of the Armenian Apostolic Church of the Eastern United States

-- Payam Akhavan, former UN prosecutor at The Hague and lead international counsel in this case

-- Cem Sofuogleu, Turkish human rights lawyer and local counsel in this case

-- Teny Pirri-Simonian, Senior Advisor to the Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia

-- Aram Hamparian, Executive Director of the Armenian National Committee of America

On Tuesday April 28th, the Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia filed a lawsuit in the Turkish Constitutional Court to regain ownership of the historic headquarters of the Church, which includes the Catholicosate, the monastery and cathedral of St. Sophia, a major Armenian Christian holy site located in the Sis (currently Kozan), in south-central Turkey.

This site was confiscated by the Turkish Government following the Genocide of 1915 in which an estimated 1.5 million Armenians were killed or deported by the Ottoman Empire.

This lawsuit reflects the determination of Armenians worldwide, on the Centenary of the Genocide, to reclaim their sacred religious property and Christian heritage in lands where they lived peacefully for centuries.

The Catholicosate which is the administrative center of the church, was moved from Armenia to Cilicia in the 10th century, and after changing a few locations it was finally established in Sis in the year 1295, where it remained until 1921. Under the Ottoman Empire, the Catholicosate of Cilicia was recognized as an independent church. During the Armenian Genocide of 1915-1923, the Armenian population of Sis was massacred and deported, and its Christian holy sites were pillaged and confiscated. More here.

In 301 A.D., Armenia became the first nation to adopt Christianity as its state religion. Armenians have had a long historical presence in what is present-day Turkey.

According to Payam Akhavan, a former UN prosecutor and lead international counsel in this legal action, the return of the historical Seat of the Catholicosate of Cilicia “is a litmus test for the Turkish Government’s respect for the human rights of its Christian minorities, their freedom of worship in a culture of tolerance and dignity.

This is a unique opportunity to do justice, to help heal the wounds of the past, to move towards Turkish-Armenian reconciliation, a better future for both nations.”

ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian noted that "The restoration of the Catholicosate would represent an act of justice, a first step toward the legal return of the Armenian Church and its faithful to their lawful place in their rightful homeland, and a meaningful milestone in the Armenian nation's journey toward a just resolution of the Armenian Genocide."

Russia's Armenian Genocide statement might endanger Turkish Stream.

Russia's Armenian Genocide statement might endanger Turkish Stream. (Taz).

Despite the fact that the Turkish authorities urged for justice regarding the 1915 events, such countries as Russia and France blindly chose to hold Armenia’s side.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, commenting on the visit of President Vladimir Putin to Yerevan, said that “each country makes decisions on its own, and Russia, in turn, made this decision a long time ago.” This justification could have calmed Ankara down, if not for Putin's words that the 1915 events are the so-called Armenian genocide. Ankara expressed serious resentment.

Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, commenting on the visit of heads of Russia and France to Yerevan in order to participate in activities in connection with the “centennial” of the so-called Armenian genocide, said that this decision casts doubts on the neutrality of the OSCE Minsk Group.

It is impossible not to agree with it, despite the fact that the Russian side said that Putin's visit to Yerevan would not affect relations with Ankara.

"It is quite natural that the president was with other counterparts in Yerevan,” spokesman for the Russian president Dmitry Peskov said. “It is very important to thoroughly examine President Putin’s speech. It is also very important not to forget that at the same time, Turkey is our strategic partner. We have diversified relations. We believe that the prospects for the development of our relations are wide."

This will not affect the construction of the Akkuyu nuclear power plant, however one must not forget that there is also the Turkish Stream project which Russia greatly needs.
Turkey has already made a statement that it will reconsider cooperation with a number of countries after April 24 that have lost neutrality on the issue related to the events of 1915.
Of course, along with Europe, Russia is also on the "black list" of Ankara. It is not ruled out that after President Putin’s visit to Yerevan and his statements about the events of 1915, Ankara will reconsider the issue of the Turkish Stream construction.

The issue of implementation of Turkish Stream project causes controversy in Turkey. The main reason is Russia’s demand from Turkey to make additional concessions. Media hasn’t specified what kind of concession it is, but this led to refusal of Turkey’s BOTAS company from signing an agreement on discount for Russian gas delivered to Turkey.

Although the sides were expected to sign the discount agreement in March 2015, Turkey hasn’t signed it so far. Another disputed issue is that Russia has completely isolated Turkey’s BOTAS company from the construction of the Turkish Stream, which doesn’t meet Ankara’s interests.

All these facts suggest that the visit of Russian president to Armenia and his remarks about the “Armenian genocide” first of all put Russia’s energy interests under threat. Turkish authorities will unlikely miss the chance to use this for their purposes.

What the Vatican archives reveal about the Armenian Genocide.

What the Vatican archives reveal about the Armenian Genocide. (VaticanRadio).[GoogleTranslate].

This is probably one of the darkest pages of the twentieth century that the Armenians call Medz Yeghern "Grand Mal", namely the massacres were victims almost a million and a half of their under the Ottoman Empire between 1915 and 1917.

And that's branded with the Armenians commemorate the centenary of Friday these tragic events, which constitute for them a "genocide." A term that Turkey rejects categorically denying any intention of systematic extermination of the Armenians, preferring instead to speak of "civil war".

At the Vatican, a Mass presided by Pope Francis, was celebrated on April 12 in memory of the victims of this "crazy and terrible extermination" ... The Holy See and Pope Benedict XV, at the time, were among alone have taken the measure of current events, and engaged fully on the diplomatic and humanitarian level, in favor of the Armenians, regardless of their religious sensibilities. This is revealed precious Vatican archives, studied and published recently by Father George Ruyssen, Belgian Jesuit , professor at the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome.

http://media02.radiovaticana.va/audio/audio2/mp3/00474749.mp3 (French).

Voice recording of Father George Ruyssen.


Record and upload voice >>

What Demonstrate these archives? In What are they exceptional? It is that they clearly show that the Vatican is driven by interests that are not economic and geopolitical interests that were indeed the interests of other powers which also relate the events of the genocide but from another point of view while the Vatican, the Church is essentially driven by an interest, I would say, spiritual and also humanitarian and therefore not by economic, geopolitical or military interests, if you want.

These archives therefore attest that the Holy See was informed about current events at the time and even better, he tried to intervene in favor of the Armenians. In what way?

What happened April 24, 1915? It is a raid, deportation of 300 to 400 Armenians from the capital, so of Constantinople and Istanbul were arrested and deported to the interior of the Ottoman Empire.

Now at that time, the same day, the Apostolic Delegate, Archbishop Angelo Maria Dolci was informed of these events since two days later, on April 24 (it's a letter of April 27 if I am not mistaken) it sends a report to the Vatican in relating this event, this raid of 300-400 deported Armenians within the Ottoman Empire. Then, gradually, the apostolic delegate comes to collect other information.

It will be informed by the Armenian bishops themselves but also by the Franciscan missionaries, Dominicans and Jesuits who were also present in the Ottoman Empire.

He'll be informed, it will collect reports of these people who are eye witnesses to what is happening today. For example, in Mardin, there occurred this or Trebizond, yesterday there was a deportation. So these people, these monks will write him reports he will know the Vatican. What the Vatican did? Well, the Pope has written twice to the Ottoman Sultan, Mohammed V, who was Sultan at that time to stop the killings, saying, " Well, I am aware of what is happening in the empire and I beg you to stop these killings . " So the first letter of Pope Benedict XV was dated September 10, 1915.

So if I may, I can give a piece of this letter I have here before me

" Majesty, while sorrow for the horrors of the great struggle in which, with the great nations of Europe, is hired the powerful empire of your majesty (the Ottoman Empire) we tear the soul very painful groans echo of an entire people, which in the broad areas of the Ottoman, is subjected to unspeakable suffering arrivals up us. The Armenian nation has seen many of his son sent to their deaths, others many imprisoned or exiled including several clerics and even some bishops. And now it is referred that entire populations of villages and towns are forced to abandon their homes to move in the middle of the Great Plains and suffering in distant places or concentration in addition to moral suffering, they to endure the privations of abject poverty and even tortures of hunger. We believe, Sire, that such excesses take place against the will of the government of your majesty . " There was another letter since the killings will continue.

Following the Pope's letter, the massacres slowdown a little. Things will calm down a little but not much order to stop the killings. The massacres will continue and this is what will result in a second letter of Pope Benedict XV in the same sultan, the sultan Mohammed V, which is dated 12 March 1918.

And there is a letter that, in my opinion, unknown (I do not know her at all), it's a letter that the Pope sent three days before the end of the First World War, that is to say on 8 November 1918, three days before the armistice of 11 November. He sent a letter to President Wilson, the US president when the Pope advocates the independence of Armenia.

The Pope, in a note dated 1 August 1917, refers to this note in his letter. It was a note in favor of peace. Benedict XV intervenes several times during the first World War in favor of peace.

The note of 1 August 1917 mentions various points: the exchange of prisoners of war, etc. But one of the points is the independence of Armenia, is the creation of an independent Armenia. That will be the note of peace from 1 August 1917 will directly inspire the 14 points of President Wilson. He will present after the 1st World War, when the peace conference, the 14 points that are inspired by the note of peace of Pope Benedict XV.

The Holy See has of course worked, you've discussed at length, on the diplomatic front. Is that one can say that he intervened at other levels as well?

On a humanitarian level. The effort of the Holy See is not just a political but also diplomatic effort at the humanitarian level.

Remember that during the First World War, UNICEF, the High Commissioner for Refugees, the international organizations did not exist at the time. During the First World War, what was? The Red Cross and then, the Catholic Church, also Protestants.

The Catholic Church and the Pope is invested in humanitarian terms by sending money to refugees, survivors, orphans. And unfortunately it is a little known point.

By initiative of the apostolic delegate, Archbishop Angelo Maria Dolci (his nickname is the angel of the Armenians), the Pope founded a "Benedict XV" orphanage for Armenian orphans in Constantinople.

And then came those orphans in Italy. And where did they come to Italy? They were housed in the papal palace in Castel Gandolfo. These orphans stayed there about a year. They were hosted by the Pope himself before being transferred to Turin.

A hundred years later, so today, the time is just as tragic. Persecution against Christians are increasingly violent and in several countries: Nigeria, Kenya, Syria, Iraq, etc. The Pope, before these tragedies denounced the indifference of some and even their silence complicit in the atrocities we suffer today.

In your opinion, in what spirit should be approached this centenary in light of what is happening today and what lesson can we and should we draw?

Unfortunately, things are repeated. What we read in the reports sent by the Apostolic Delegate in the reports there a hundred years, one could read today by putting in place of Armenian place names from Nigeria, Kenya, the Syria, Iraq.

Today we can read exactly the same things that happened a hundred years ago. And still, indifference is the same as a hundred years ago. The lesson drawn in, it is this indifference that the Pope, rightly hammered: indifference, apathy powers.

Turkish Nat Def minister: France, UK and Russia ‘responsible for all evil in world’

Turkish Nat Def minister: France, UK and Russia ‘responsible for all evil in world’. (Bugun).

Turkey’s Minister of National Defense İsmet Yılmaz says that it was France, Britain and Russia who armed and provoked the Armenians during World War I and that “these three countries have committed every form of evil against all other nations.”

Criticizing the European Parliament and several countries’ acceptance of the term “genocide” for the mass killings of Armenians in 1915, Defense Minister Yılmaz said, “Since we’re the rightful owners of this state, we never brought up the cruelty, injustice, deportations and massacres that were inflicted on us. And so, as we refrained from voicing our own pain, others started putting their pain before ours.”

Defense Minister Yılmaz said on Saturday that while Turkish men were off fighting in the fronts of World War I, the Great Powers wanted to build an Armenian state on Turkish soil and so armed Armenian rebels, and that their deportation to Syria was a precaution to protect the people of Anatolia.

“If there is anyone responsible [for the events of 1915] it is those who armed the Armenian terrorists: France, Britain and Russia,” he said, “It is these three countries that have committed every form of evil against all other nations.”

He added that those three countries exposed the “Crusader mindset that rested in the back of their minds” and called on the Turkish nations to unite in solidarity and undermine their "plans and calculations." Hmmmm......And the Future heir of the British throne, head of the English Church go's to the event listening how Jesus is just a mere Prophet, Guess the future of the English Church is pretty bleak..... I wonder what Churchill would have said and Done.

Members of Congress Disappointed With Obama's Reluctance to Call 1915 Events Genocide

Members of Congress Disappointed With Obama's cowardliness Reluctance to Call 1915 Events Genocide. (AINA).

WASHINGTON -- Lawmakers on Wednesday evening honored lives lost during the Armenian genocide 100 years ago -- and pressed the global community to recognize what happened, urging President Barack Obama to lead on the issue.


"We must speak the truth and not dishonor those who died," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. "We will continue to insist on the truth until it is widely accepted and apologized for."

White House officials this week said Obama would not refer to the 1915 events as genocide, despite the fact that he did call it that when he was a senator.

"Genocide is genocide. That is plain and simple and cannot be called anything else. Just last week Pope Francis, in a historic acknowledgement, tells us that he knows it. He called the events from 100 years ago the first genocide of the century. And he is right," said Democrat Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey.

Armenians accuse Turkey, heirs of the Ottoman Empire, of massacring 1.5 million Armenians in 1915. Other groups, like the Greeks and Assyrians, also say their ancestors died during the genocide.
Turks claim that events in the early 20th century claimed the lives of both Armenians and Turks during the First World War.

In 2008, Barack Obama, then a senator and presidential candidate, said: "The Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence. The facts are undeniable."

Lawmakers expressed their frustration with the president's decision.

"They try, but they'll not put us down. I promise you that," said Republican Rep. Gus Bilirakis of Florida. "Facts are stubborn things."Democratic Rep. Brad Sherman of California agreed.
"What kind of world power can be cowed into denying [the genocide]?" he said. "Genocide denial is the final act of a genocide. First a people is destroyed, and then the perpetrators try to destroy the memory of the destruction. But genocide denial is also the first step in the next genocide."

A statue in memory of the genocide will be unveiled on Friday in Las Vegas's Sunset Park, according to Nevada Rep. Dina Titus, a Democrat.

"I was very disappointed that our own president didn't live up to his promise," she said. Titus referred to the Turkish state as the "enemy."

"We need the facts to be known, that 1.5 million Armenians died, not by accident, but by design," said Rep. Judy Chu, Democrat of California. "We threaten our future on denial, explaining the genocide away, attributing it just to the cost of war makes it easier the next time a people is singled-out or targeted for extinction."

Chu mentioned the unveiling of an Armenian genocide statue last week in Pasadena. The structure, fashioned like a tripod, resembles the structure used by Ottomans to hang Armenians, according to Chu. In a year's time, 1.5 million drops of water, or teardrops, are expected to fall from the top of the structure.

Attendee Simon Shahinian, an intern in Maryland Democratic Rep. Chris Van Hollen's office, said that Turkey would most likely not recognize the genocide anytime soon.

"[Recognition is] something I really want to see happen," Shahinian said. "And it's frustrating that the U.S. hasn't recognized it."

More than 20 countries and 40 U.S. states recognize the Armenian genocide. Hmmmm........Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. - Abraham Lincoln

If Turkey denies the Armenian genocide of 1915, it is (also) to hide the massacres of 1895

If Turkey denies the Armenian genocide of 1915, it is (also) to hide the massacres of 1895. (DI). [Googletranslate].

The Armenian Genocide was the first genocide of the 20th century. In 1895, Muslims made a real massacre.

"For centuries, the Turks simply lived like parasites on the backs of the people busy and industrious. They imposed their economic extinction, stole their most beautiful girls to take them by force in their harems, took Christian male infants by hundreds of miles to make the Muslim soldiers. I do not intend to describe the terrible vassalage and oppression that lasted five centuries. My goal is simply to emphasize this innate attitude towards the Muslim Turkish people who are not of their own race and religion, that they are not human beings but merely slaves allowed to live when they are of interest to their masters, or can be destroyed without mercy when they ceased to be useful. This attitude is reinforced by a total disregard for human life and an intense pleasure in inflicting physical pain, which is not unusual among primitive peoples. "- ( Henry Morgenthau , US Ambassador to Constantinople from 1913 to 1916)

In all, two million Armenians were either displaced from their ancestral lands, or eliminated, much like the Europeans want this to happen to the Jews in Palestine today.

For this, the Ottoman Turkish Muslims, who do not tolerate Christians - nothing is new - organized genocide to rid the Armenian and Greek. Thus 1.5 million people lost their lives between 1915 and 23, during and after the First World War.

This is the genocide which the Turks now deny the existence (they have not always denied).

But before that, between 1894 and 1896, about 300 000 to 400 000 inhabitants of Armenian Christian villages were massacred in pogroms organized by special regiments of the Sultan Abdul-Hamid II , also known as the "Red Sultan" for the massacres he committed against the Ottoman Armenian population.

The worst of these massacres took place in 1895 300,000 civilians, mainly men, were savagely, Islamically slaughtered. It must be said that Armenian Christians were far more educated, wealthier inhabitants of the old Turkish Empire, but also already the so-called - the infidels, non believers in Islam.

The massacres were -officially destined for undermining the Armenian nationalist sentiment and frighten the Armenians. Sultan Abdul-Hamid II was frightened by the liveliness of the activity of Armenian political groups, and wanted to curb their growth before they acquire greater influence by spreading ideas about civil rights and autonomy. However, according to historians, he was not considering as his successors, the Young Turks,  the Armenians to disappear as a people.

The testimony of Vilbert, Shipley and Prjevalsky, representatives of France, Britain and Russia, totally contradicts the thesis of non genocidal massacre

"We, gentlemen Vilbert, Shipley and Prjevalsky, representatives of France, Britain and Russia have become convinced, and arrived at the conclusion in functions of the evidence before us, the Armenians were massacred without age or sex, and that, in fact, for a period of three weeks between August 12 and September 4, it is no exaggeration to say that the Armenians were absolutely hunted like wild beasts, were killed where they were found, and if the killing was not more important it is, I think, only to the extent of the mountains of this region, which has allowed people to spread and s escape more easily.

In fact, and speaking with a full sense of responsibility, I am forced to admit that was imposed on me the conviction that it was not so much the capture of the Murad agitator, or suppression of a pseudo -revolt, who were wanted by the Turkish authorities but the outright extermination of Ghelieguzan and Talori "(in Armenian massacres in which the sword of Mohammed and Armenian atrocities )"

US President Grover Cleveland wrote, December 2, 1895 in his message to Congress:

"Some events in Turkey have continued to cause concern. Reports of massacres of Christians in Armenia, and development, there and in other regions, in the spirit of a fanatical hostility against the Christian influence, causes a natural fear (since dubbed Islamophobia) for safety men and women devotees, belonging to American missionary societies abroad, and who reside in Turkey under the guarantee of law and practice for the legitimate practice of their educational and religious mission. "

When in 1896 the US threatened the Sultan Abdul Hamid II to cease the "persecution" of Armenians, the latter, in its reply, did as his successor Erdogan today: he denied any persecution of Armenians, but declared that the Ottoman Empire had received thousands of Muslim refugees who fled the oppression of Christian Bulgaria and Russia.

Thus the Turks created "Turkey for the Turks".

Reproduction authorized with the following: © Hervé Roubaix Dreuz.info .

'Angry Man of Europe' Turkey: "Russia knows genocide well, we won't forgive Germany and France"

'Angry Man of Europe' Turkey: "Russia knows genocide well, we won't forgive Germany and France" (HD).

Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Yalcin Akdogan Friday has called on Vladimir Putin to condemn killings in Syria after Vladimir Putin described the 1915 events as "genocide", Anadolu agency reported.

Putin used the word "genocide" to qualify what happened to Armenians during the First World War in a statement released on the Kremlin's website Thursday.

“April 24, 1915, is a mournful date, related to one of the most horrendous and dramatic events in human history, the genocide of the Armenian people,” Putin said in a letter called "World Without Genocide."

"Hundreds of thousands of people were killed in Syria. I wish Putin could have made a statement about it and condemned (Bashar Al-) Assad and shared these pains," Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Yalcin Akdogan said Friday in response to Putin’s statement.

Davutoglu also reacted to Putin's statement. "Any position that disturbs and insults our history, abuses our trust," he said on Friday.

Turkey said on April 24 that it rejected and condemned Russian President Vladimir Putin calling the 1915 mass killings of Ottoman Armenians a "genocide."

"Taking into account the mass atrocities and exiles in Caucasus, in the Central Asia and Eastern Europe committed by Russia for a century; collective punishment methods such as Holodomor as well as inhumane practices especially against Turkish and Muslim people in Russia’s own history, we consider that Russia is best-suited to know what exactly “genocide” and its legal dimension are," a foreign ministry statement said.

Turkey also condemned Duma's April 24 resolution that described the 1915 events as "genocide."

"The only thing that Russia can do in this issue is to leave its biased attitude aside and encourage Armenia and the Armenians to respond positively to the calls of Turkey for peace and friendship," the statement added.

 FRANCE:

Turkey condemned France's "unjust and partial attitude" to the deaths of Armenians in 1915 late on April 24. "French President Francois Hollande participated, as he had announced long time ago, at the ceremony held in Yerevan on 24 April, 2015, which instead of being a commemoration for the losses incurred in the past, turned out to be an occasion to slander Turkish identity, history and society," the Foreign Ministry said in a separate statement.

The statement added that Hollande had "regrettably reiterated his support to the Armenian nationalist narrative."

Russian President Vladimir Putin also attended the events in the Armenian capital held to mark the 100th anniversary of the 1915 incidents, which heard Hollande urge Turkey to end its refusal to recognize the deaths as "genocide."

"It would have been expected from President Hollande that during these ceremonies he would acknowledge that, regardless of religion or ethnicity, all Ottoman citizens endured tragic sufferings during the process of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire," the statement added.

"Such an approach, which does not discriminate between the sufferings of those who belong to different religions, would have undoubtedly been seen as a positive and embracing attitude by the 600,000 Turks living in France."

France "unfortunately preferred to continue its discriminatory approach and Turkey unequivocally rejects and condemns France's unjust and partial attitude."

GERMANY:

The ministry also criticized German President Joachim Gauck on April 24 after he referred to the 1915 incidents as "genocide."

The response from the ministry came one a day after Gauck referred to the tragedy of a century ago as a "genocide" in remarks he made at a memorial service at the historical Berlin Cathedral.

The ministry said in a statement his comments were "baseless allegations directed towards Turkish identity, history and society."

It added: "Contrary to law and historical facts, President Gauck has not the right to attribute on the Turkish people a crime which they have not committed."

"It is expected from the authorities who represent social unity, integrity and harmony, to take the sensitivities of all the members of the society into consideration and express a more embracing approach," it read.

The statement went on: "In this sense, it is astonishing that President Gauck has also disregarded the opinions of hundreds of thousands of Turkish-German citizens whom he also represents."

It sait the “Turkish nation will not forget and forgive President Gauck's statements." Read the full story here.