Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

[Armanen]

Re: Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

Alexandros,

For all the talk about the Halki seminary and 'crucified' minority in Turkey, when will the so called 'muslims' in Greece be able to legally identify themselves as 'Turks' in accordance with their own preference and be given the right to elect their own religious leaders instead of being goverment appointed. Isn't it about time the Greeks practice what they preach?

Don't change the subject. Muslims and turks especially are treated much better than Christians are in Muslims nations, especially turkey. The discrimination in Greece and that in turkey are on different levels.

[Alexandros]

Re: Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

Alexandros,

For all the talk about the Halki seminary and 'crucified' minority in Turkey, when will the so called 'muslims' in Greece be able to legally identify themselves as 'Turks' in accordance with their own preference and be given the right to elect their own religious leaders instead of being goverment appointed. Isn't it about time the Greeks practice what they preach?

There are nearly no Greeks left in Istanbul Jos. Compare today the 3-4 thousand Greeks left in Istanbul to the 60-80 thousand(they could be even more) Turks in Greek Thrace and you may want to take a step back before trying to change the subject. What happened with the rest of Greeks in Istanbul? Did a wind just blow them away from Istanbul?

As for who is Muslim and who is Turk is a matter for people themselves to decide. So yes, I`m all for self-identification. But it`s stipulated in the Lausanne treaty that Greeks, Armenians and the Je_ws in Istanbul are recognized as a "Non-Muslim minority"; and the Turks, Pomaks and the Romas in Greek Thrace are recognized as a "Muslim minority".

Now, I can`t help that Turkey wanted to get rid of the Greeks which lead to Greece taking discriminatory measures as article 19(which later was repealed) to deprive Turks/Muslims their Greek citizenship. But both countries have unfortunately punished their own minorities for what their "neighbour" on the other side of the Agean sea did. But still, the Turkish/Muslim minority in Greek Thrace is thriving. You can`t really say the same about the Greek minority in Istanbul.

And by the way, the Halki school school fall within the scope of article 40 of the Lausanne treaty according to two Turkish professors:

The Board of Trustees appointed to the HS upon its closure in 1971 designated Professor Ömer İlhan Akipek, member of Ankara University’s Faculty of Law as their lawyer. He requested the cancellation of this administrative ruling and submitted a petition to the State Council for the action on the following summarized grounds on November 17th 1971:

1- This school is among those which fall within the scope of Article 40 of the Lausanne Treaty.

2- There is no difference between the Republic of Turkey’s High School Diploma and those from Theology Schools apart from the phrase “they are regarded as educated in the level of schools rendering vocational education for at least one year after high school”.

3- Graduates of Theology Schools complete their military service just like any other high school graduate.

4- Those who want to continue their education at university take an entrance exam just like any other high school graduate.

5- Graduates of this division are only recognized as priests.

6- The seminary was not founded as per the Law concerning Private Institutions of Higher Education, numbered 625 and in effect since 1844. As a matter of fact, a private school of higher education could not be opened as per legislation operative during the time when the regulations of the seminary were approved.

7- That no procedures were implemented for the HS, even though it was affiliated with existing universities and academies as per law 1472, allowing students of all closed private institutions of higher education to continue their studies, was a clear indication that the legislator did not consider this school as a college.

Link

More...

The Board of Trustees of the seminary ordered Professor Hicri Fişek, member of Ankara University’s Faculty of Law, to prepare a statement of his views. In his statement dated February 10th 1974, Prof. Fişek echoed the views expressed by Mr.Akipek as summarized below:

1- When the seminary was closed, it was functioning as a minority school as set forth in Article 25 of Law no. 625. This Article referred to Articles 40 and 41 of the Lausanne Treaty. However closing the HS and not closing similar regular middle schools for Turkish citizens contradicts the principle of equality as noted in the Lausanne Treaty.

2- Now that minorities are free to practice their own religious services as per the Lausanne Treaty, the education of clergymen becomes a necessity. As Article 40 stipulates, “minorities can found and establish any and all schools and education and training institutions”. Opening schools to educate clergymen would therefore undermine the principle of secularism less than the opening of theology schools by the secular state.

3- Like other high schools, diplomas are signed by directors and directors of National Education. But private schools of higher education diplomas granted during the same period were signed by the school director and Ministry of National Education.

4- It was openly stated in the seminary’s regulations, approved by the Ministry of National Education, that such a diploma would not confer rights provided by a university or college diploma. In spite of such views, the submission of a file for action was stopped on the above grounds.

However, provisions in the Lausanne Treaty are clear on this issue. Article no. 40 of the Treaty directly stipulates the following in relation to the matter:

“Turkish nationals belonging to non-Moslem minorities shall enjoy the same treatment and security [guarantee] in law and in fact as other Turkish nationals. In particular, they shall have an equal right to establish, manage and control at their own expense, any charitable, religious and social institutions, any schools and other establishments for instruction and education, with the right to use their own language and to exercise their own religion freely therein”.

Link

I personally wouldn`t have any problem if the Muslim minority wanted to elect their own religious leaders in Greek Thrace. But the Patriarch has the same problem: there are so few Greeks left in Istanbul and considering the Halki school being closed since 1971 plus all the restrictions that have been put on the Patriarch it will only be a matter of time before the Patriarch will be forced to close which is also Turkey`s goal.

There are also two Turkish members that were elected to the Greek Parliament in the last elections. How many Greeks have a seat in the Turkish parliament?

Can a Greek church in Turkey register in what ever name they want?

European court rules against Turkey in Greek Orthodox church case

02.03.2009

The European Court on Human Rights (ECHR) ruled Tuesday that Turkey violated the property rights of a Greek Orthodox Church on the Aegean island of Bo_zcaada.

The Foundation of the Bo_zcaada Kimisis Teodoku Greek Orthodox Church had complained of the Turkish courts’ refusal to register its property in the land register under its name, relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property), Article 6 (right to a fair trial), Article 9 (right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion), Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination).

According to the ruling, Turkey was ordered to pay the foundation 105,000 euros ($132,406) compensation, including the cost of proceedings, for violating Article 1, which refers to the protection of property.

The ECHR ruled that Turkey did not violate the other articles in the application.

Link

I could extend the list but considering that you want to defend a country who is leading in human rights violations in Europe...

Where is Turkey at human rights?

Monday, November 2, 2009

RIZA TÜRMEN

The overall picture in the EHCR decisions is: In a total of 97,300 applications to the court as of Jan. 1, 2009, Russia takes the lead with 27,580 (28 percent) and Turkey follows with 11,100 (11.4 percent). Turkey leads in human rights violations. In a total of 1,857 cases, the ECHR decided against Turkey. Russia followed with 579 convictions.

Full article here

...I`m going to take your criticism lightly.

You can call Greece a hypocrit all you want but that`s the prize Turkey - and to some extent the Turkish/Muslim minority in Greek Thrace - will have to pay for kicking out the Greeks from Istanbul. Sad but true.

I wish you good luck to join the EU.

[Jos]

Re: Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

There are nearly no Greeks left in Istanbul Jos. Compare today the 3-4 thousand Greeks left in Istanbul to the 60-80 thousand(they could be even more) Turks in Greek Thrace and you may want to take a step back before trying to change the subject. What happened with the rest of Greeks in Istanbul? Did a wind just blow them away from Istanbul?

As for who is Muslim and who is Turk is a matter for people themselves to decide. So yes, I`m all for self-identification. But it`s stipulated in the Lausanne treaty that Greeks, Armenians and the Je_ws in Istanbul are recognized as a "Non-Muslim minority"; and the Turks, Pomaks and the Romas in Greek Thrace are recognized as a "Muslim minority".

Now, I can`t help that Turkey wanted to get rid of the Greeks which lead to Greece taking discriminatory measures as article 19(which later was repealed) to deprive Turks/Muslims their Greek citizenship. But both countries have unfortunately punished their own minorities for what their "neighbour" on the other side of the Agean sea did. But still, the Turkish/Muslim minority in Greek Thrace is thriving. You can`t really say the same about the Greek minority in Istanbul.

And by the way, the Halki school school fall within the scope of article 40 of the Lausanne treaty according to two Turkish professors:



More...




I personally wouldn`t have any problem if the Muslim minority wanted to elect their own religious leaders in Greek Thrace. But the Patriarch has the same problem: there are so few Greeks left in Istanbul and considering the Halki school being closed since 1971 plus all the restrictions that have been put on the Patriarch it will only be a matter of time before the Patriarch will be forced to close which is also Turkey`s goal.

There are also two Turkish members that were elected to the Greek Parliament in the last elections. How many Greeks have a seat in the Turkish parliament?

Can a Greek church in Turkey register in what ever name they want?



I could extend the list but considering that you want to defend a country who is leading in human rights violations in Europe...



...I`m going to take your criticism lightly.

You can call Greece a hypocrit all you want but that`s the prize Turkey - and to some extent the Turkish/Muslim minority in Greek Thrace - will have to pay for kicking out the Greeks from Istanbul. Sad but true.

I wish you good luck to join the EU.

You say you've taken my criticism lightly but only after coming out guns blazing. Alexandros, this is not a historical question but one for the year 2009. Turkey may deserve a kick in the teeth for it's treatment of the Patriarch and it's minorities generally but that kick can't come from Greece due to it's own hypocrisy and rigid interpretations. Let it come from others until the ethnic Turks in Greece are able to recognise themselves as such and are given voting rights for their own religious constituency. Suggesting that this is the price that must be paid for kicking out the Greeks from Istanbul sounds rather redundant and quite a poor validation of it's actions.

I can't argue against the Greek church in Turkey registering in what ever name they want. They should be allowed to, but keep that in context as it's only a naming issue. At least they have churches. Do the muslims of Athens have a mosque yet, or are they still forced to pray together in disused factories, basements and back of coffee shops? Nothing quite like Greek red tape....

[Alexandros]

Re: Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

You say you've taken my criticism lightly but only after coming out guns blazing. Alexandros, this is not a historical question but one for the year 2009. Turkey may deserve a kick in the teeth for it's treatment of the Patriarch and it's minorities generally but that kick can't come from Greece due to it's own hypocrisy and rigid interpretations. Let it come from others until the ethnic Turks in Greece are able to recognise themselves as such and are given voting rights for their own religious constituency. Suggesting that this is the price that must be paid for kicking out the Greeks from Istanbul sounds rather redundant and quite a poor validation of it's actions.

I can't argue against the Greek church in Turkey registering in what ever name they want. They should be allowed to, but keep that in context as it's only a naming issue. At least they have churches. Do the muslims of Athens have a mosque yet, or are they still forced to pray together in disused factories, basements and back of coffee shops? Nothing quite like Greek red tape....

You say you've taken my criticism lightly but only after coming out guns blazing.

Not at all. It seems that you are taking it too personal.

Alexandros, this is not a historical question but one for the year 2009. Turkey may deserve a kick in the teeth for it's treatment of the Patriarch and it's minorities generally but that kick can't come from Greece due to it's own hypocrisy and rigid interpretations. Let it come from others until the ethnic Turks in Greece are able to recognise themselves as such and are given voting rights for their own religious constituency.

And who are the "others"?

Suggesting that this is the price that must be paid for kicking out the Greeks from Istanbul sounds rather redundant and quite a poor validation of it's actions.

Had Turkey not kicked out the Greeks from Istanbul which started 1955 after a Turkish MIT agent named Oktay Engin planted the bomb at Ataturk`s birthhouse in Thessaloniki in order to blame the Greeks and use that as an excuse to commit a pogrom against the Greeks in Istanbul 1955, we may not have been talking about issue today. Greece`s discriminatory measures against the Turks/Muslims in Greek Thrace came AFTER the pogrom against the Greeks 1955. I`m not saying it was right to do it but I think you get the point.

I can't argue against the Greek church in Turkey registering in what ever name they want. They should be allowed to, but keep that in context as it's only a naming issue. At least they have churches.

It`s only a name issue? Oh really? How about this then:

Attorney Orhan Kemal Cengiz


European Human Rights Court Rules in Favor of Turkish Church

Christians hope decision will lead to greater religious freedom.

ISTANBUL, December 18 (CDN) — In a decision many hope will lead to greater religious freedom in Turkey, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found that a Turkish court ruling barring a church from starting a foundation violated the congregation’s right to freedom of association.

Orhan Kemal Cengiz, a Turkish attorney and legal advisor for the litigants, said the decision earlier this year was the first time the ECHR has held that religious organizations have a right to exist in Turkey. Other issues the court addressed dealt with organizations’ rights to own property, he said.

Cengiz added that this case is just the first of many needed to correct conflicts within the Turkish legal system in regard to freedom of association, known in Turkey as the concept of “legal personality.”

“This case is a significant victory, but it is the first case in a long line of cases to come,” Cengiz said.

Ihsan Ozbek, pastor of Kurtulus Church in Ankara, which set out to establish the foundation, said he was pleased with the court’s decision.

“It’s a good thing to have that decision,” he said. “It will help future churches and Christian organizations.”

On Dec. 21, 2000, Ozbek and 15 other Turkish nationals applied to a court in Ankara to form the “Foundation of Liberation Churches,” to provide assistance to victims of disasters. The court referred the matter to the Directorate General of Foundations, which opposed it because, according to its interpretation of the organization’s constitution, the foundation sought to help only other Protestants. Such a purpose would be in violation of the Turkish civil code, which states that establishing a foundation to assist a specific community at the exclusion of others was prohibited.

On Jan. 22, 2002, the church group appealed the decision to the higher Court of Cassation. They agreed that the constitution should be changed to more accurately reflect the true nature of the organization, which was to give assistance to victims of natural disasters regardless of their spiritual beliefs. In February of the same year, the court rejected their appeal.

Later that year, on Aug. 29, 2002, under the guidance of Cengiz, the group appealed the decision to the ECHR. Founded in 1959 by the European Convention on Human Rights, the ECHR is the highest civil human rights court in Europe. Of the 47 countries that are signatories to the convention, Turkey accounts for more that 11 percent of the court’s caseload.

On Oct. 11, 2005 the court agreed to hear the case. More than four years later, on June 10, it publicly issued a verdict.

In its decision, the court unanimously found that the Turkish Courts’ “refusal to register the foundation, although permitted under Turkish law, had not been necessary in a democratic society, and that there had been a violation of Article 11.”

Article 11 of the convention deals with the rights of people to associate and assemble with others.

“The applicants had been willing to amend the constitution of their foundation both to reflect their true aims and to comply with the legal requirements for registration,” the court decision stated. “However, by not allowing them time to do this – something they had done in a similar case – the Court of Cassation had prevented them from setting up a foundation that would have had legal status.”

The decision was issued by seven judges, one of them Turkish. The court awarded 2,500 euros (US$3,600) to each of the 16 members of the group, in addition to 5,200 euros (US$7,490) to the group as a whole.

After being forbidden to open a foundation, the Protestant group opened an association in 2004, after Turkish law had been amended allowing them to do so. Foundations and associations in Turkey differ mostly in their ability to collect and distribute money. The aims of the association were similar to that of the proposed foundation, with the exception of reference to supporting one particular community.

Ozbek said the directorate’s office has been the main obstacle in preventing people from forming Christian foundations.

“Now that they have the decision, they will be forced to say yes,” he said.

Link

Do the muslims of Athens have a mosque yet, or are they still forced to pray together in disused factories, basements and back of coffee shops? Nothing quite like Greek red tape....

There are 300 mosques in Greek Thrace and the Greek state will fund the building of a new official mosque in Athens by 2010 that will cost 15 million euros and will replace private prayer houses set up in basements, apartments and converted coffee houses and used by tens of thousands of immigrants.

Jos, maybe you are trying too hard to defend your country who is leading in human rights violations in Europe. But hey, keep up the good work!

[Jos]

Re: Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

[QUOTE=Alexandros;287865]

And who are the "others"?

Western Europe, excluding France.

It`s only a name issue? Oh really? How about this then:

I just read the article and it doesn't appear to relate to registering the name of a church but instead to creating a religious foundation or association that is more a legal issue. Nevertheless, this will need to be sorted out at some stage even requiring constitutional amendments.

There are 300 mosques in Greek Thrace and the Greek state will fund the building of a new official mosque in Athens by 2010 that will cost 15 million euros and will replace private prayer houses set up in basements, apartments and converted coffee houses and used by tens of thousands of immigrants.

Will believe it when I see it. It was supposed to be built prior to the Olympic games in 2004 and still nothing but promises.

Jos, maybe you are trying too hard to defend your country who is leading in human rights violations in Europe. But hey, keep up the good work!

Thanks Alexandros, I like to believe we're just a little misunderstood

[Alexandros]

Re: Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

[QUOTE=Jos;287868]

Western Europe, excluding France.




I just read the article and it doesn't appear to relate to registering the name of a church but instead to creating a religious foundation or association that is more a legal issue. Nevertheless, this will need to be sorted out at some stage even requiring constitutional amendments.


Will believe it when I see it. It was supposed to be built prior to the Olympic games in 2004 and still nothing but promises.




Thanks Alexandros, I like to believe we're just a little misunderstood

Western Europe, excluding France.

I would probably say the EU instead:

Eu Was Engine Of Change In Turkey, Simsek

LONDON (A.A) - 11.10.2009 - Turkish Minister of Finance, Mehmet Simsek, said Saturday "if someone told me 10-15 years ago that Turkey would become more tolerant, democratic, open and secular, I would have doubts. Yet it happened".

Participating in an annual ball of the Turkish-British Chamber of Commerce and Industry (TBCCI) as the "guest of honor", Simsek said that the European Union (EU) was the engine of change in Turkey.

We are pleased with the continuous and strong support that Britain extends to Turkey's EU bid and in other regional and international issues, Simsek stressed.

I am hopeful that Britain's support to Turkey would continue, Simsek also said.

Also speaking at the ball, British Secretary of State for Justice, Jack Straw, said that "a concept such as 'privileged partnership' would not be in line with the decision taken in 2005 and would be an insult (to Turkey). Turkey can not accept such a partnership and neither can the EU". (SOL-UK)

Link

I just read the article and it doesn't appear to relate to registering the name of a church but instead to creating a religious foundation or association that is more a legal issue.

Read again: "the Turkish courts’ refusal to register its real property in the land register under its name("GREEK"...)":

Bo_zcaada Kimisis Teodoku Rum Ortodoks Kilisesi Vakfı v. Turkey (No. 2) (nos. 37639/03, 37655/03, 26736/04 and 42670/04)

The applicant, Bo_zcaada Kimisis Teodoku Rum Ortodoks Kilisesi Vakfı (Foundation of the Bo_zcaada Kimisis Teodoku Greek Orthodox Church) is a foundation under Turkish law established in Çanakkale (Turkey). Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property), Article 6 (right to a fair trial), Article 9 (right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion), Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination), the applicant foundation complains in particular of the Turkish courts’ refusal to register its real property in the land register under its name.

Link

Read again:

Attorney Orhan Kemal Cengiz


European Human Rights Court Rules in Favor of Turkish Church

Christians hope decision will lead to greater religious freedom.

ISTANBUL, December 18 (CDN) — In a decision many hope will lead to greater religious freedom in Turkey, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found that a Turkish court ruling barring a church from starting a foundation violated the congregation’s right to freedom of association.

Orhan Kemal Cengiz, a Turkish attorney and legal advisor for the litigants, said the decision earlier this year was the first time the ECHR has held that religious organizations have a right to exist in Turkey. Other issues the court addressed dealt with organizations’ rights to own property, he said.

Cengiz added that this case is just the first of many needed to correct conflicts within the Turkish legal system in regard to freedom of association, known in Turkey as the concept of “legal personality.”

“This case is a significant victory, but it is the first case in a long line of cases to come,” Cengiz said.

Ihsan Ozbek, pastor of Kurtulus Church in Ankara, which set out to establish the foundation, said he was pleased with the court’s decision.

“It’s a good thing to have that decision,” he said. “It will help future churches and Christian organizations.”

On Dec. 21, 2000, Ozbek and 15 other Turkish nationals applied to a court in Ankara to form the “Foundation of Liberation Churches,” to provide assistance to victims of disasters. The court referred the matter to the Directorate General of Foundations, which opposed it because, according to its interpretation of the organization’s constitution, the foundation sought to help only other Protestants. Such a purpose would be in violation of the Turkish civil code, which states that establishing a foundation to assist a specific community at the exclusion of others was prohibited.

On Jan. 22, 2002, the church group appealed the decision to the higher Court of Cassation. They agreed that the constitution should be changed to more accurately reflect the true nature of the organization, which was to give assistance to victims of natural disasters regardless of their spiritual beliefs. In February of the same year, the court rejected their appeal.

Later that year, on Aug. 29, 2002, under the guidance of Cengiz, the group appealed the decision to the ECHR. Founded in 1959 by the European Convention on Human Rights, the ECHR is the highest civil human rights court in Europe. Of the 47 countries that are signatories to the convention, Turkey accounts for more that 11 percent of the court’s caseload.

On Oct. 11, 2005 the court agreed to hear the case. More than four years later, on June 10, it publicly issued a verdict.

In its decision, the court unanimously found that the Turkish Courts’ “refusal to register the foundation, although permitted under Turkish law, had not been necessary in a democratic society, and that there had been a violation of Article 11.”

Article 11 of the convention deals with the rights of people to associate and assemble with others.

“The applicants had been willing to amend the constitution of their foundation both to reflect their true aims and to comply with the legal requirements for registration,” the court decision stated. “However, by not allowing them time to do this – something they had done in a similar case – the Court of Cassation had prevented them from setting up a foundation that would have had legal status.”

The decision was issued by seven judges, one of them Turkish. The court awarded 2,500 euros (US$3,600) to each of the 16 members of the group, in addition to 5,200 euros (US$7,490) to the group as a whole.

After being forbidden to open a foundation, the Protestant group opened an association in 2004, after Turkish law had been amended allowing them to do so. Foundations and associations in Turkey differ mostly in their ability to collect and distribute money. The aims of the association were similar to that of the proposed foundation, with the exception of reference to supporting one particular community.

Ozbek said the directorate’s office has been the main obstacle in preventing people from forming Christian foundations.

“Now that they have the decision, they will be forced to say yes,” he said.

Link

Turkey doesn`t let the Greek Orthodox church register its real property in the land register under its name and bars a church from starting a foundation. You are saying that these two issues aren`t related and that this have nothing to do with how Turkey treats its minorities? Oh my, talk about living in denial.

Nevertheless, this will need to be sorted out at some stage even requiring constitutional amendments.

I will "steal" your line and say: will believe it when I see it.

Will believe it when I see it. It was supposed to be built prior to the Olympic games in 2004 and still nothing but promises.

To say that the Christians "at least they have their churches" in Turkey is to totally disregard that the Muslim minority in Greece have 300 mosques in Greek Thrace.

Thanks Alexandros,

You`re welcome.

I like to believe we're just a little misunderstood

You want to change the subject and you are taking it too personal. That`s the problem here. You still can`t or don`t want to understand that the thriving Turkish/Muslim minority in Greek Thrace is far better off than the dwindling Greek minority in Istanbul.

[Alexandros]

Re: Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

Turkey Ponders Legal Action Over Assyrian Genocide Memorial

Angus Hohenboken The Australian December 22, 2009

THE Turkish government is considering legal action over a western Sydney council's decision to erect a statue commemorating the killing of Assyrians early last century.

Turkish ambassador Oguz Ozge yesterday warned that the decision, passed unanimously by Fairfield Council last week, jeopardised Australia's relationship with his country and threatened to divide the community.

Assyrians, a Christian ethnic group whose homeland lies between northern Iraq, Syria, western Iran and southeastern Turkey, say hundreds of thousands of their people were killed by Turks during and after World War I.

The Sydney memorial was approved for installation in Edensor Park despite a request by Foreign Minister Stephen Smith that the proposal be rejected.

Mr Ozge yesterday denied the Assyrians' claims of genocide and described the council's stance as "very offensive".

"It hurts the Turkish Australians living in this country and it is an attempt at destroying the harmony of the two communities living in Australia side by side," he said. "We are looking into whether we can do anything, legally or otherwise."

The Local Government Association says it recognises that genocide took place.

However, the state and federal governments do not recognise that claim.

Riot police were deployed to keep the peace between Turkish and Assyrian groups outside the council chambers as the decision was being made last Tuesday.

Hermiz Shahen, secretary of the Assyrian Universal Alliance, yesterday admitted his group had not consulted the Turkish community over its plans, but insisted it had not been their intention to clash with them over the statue.

"There is no mention of the Turks on the plaque; that is part of our respect for the community here," Mr Shahen said.

He said the statue was dedicated to the "souls of Assyrian martyrs".

Link

[Alexandros]

Re: Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

Sassounian: CBS Exposes Turkey’s Violation of Greek Minority Rights, but Ignores Armenians

By Harut Sassounian • on December 22, 2009

On Dec. 17, CBS Network’s “60 Minutes” program aired a devastating expose of the violations of the rights of the Greek minority in Turkey.

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of the Greek Orthodox Church, headquartered in Istanbul, courageously criticized the Turkish government for treating him as a “second-class citizen.” He went on to state that he felt like he was being “crucified.”

This is perhaps the first time a major American TV network has dared to broadcast a program that reveals the discriminatory practices of the repressive Turkish regime against the Greek minority. It would appear that CBS was able to withstand the intense pressure Ankara and its highly paid Washington lobbyists routinely apply to censor programs that expose the Turkish government’s abusive behavior.

Not surprisingly, various Turkish officials, including President Gul, reacted angrily. Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu disingenuously suggested that the Greek Patriarch should have submitted his complaints to the authorities in Ankara. The foreign minister acted as if he was unaware that for years countless complaints had been lodged by the patriarch about the injustices suffered by his people. The Turkish government has not only remained unresponsive to these complaints, but has carried out a deliberate policy of harassment and intimidation to force thousands of Greeks, Armenians, Assyrians, and xxxs to abandon their homes and businesses and relocate overseas.

Bob Simon, the correspondent for “60 Minutes,” reported that “at the turn of the last century, there were nearly 2 million Orthodox Christians in Turkey; 1.5 million were expelled in 1923, and another 150,000 left after violent anti-Christian riots in Istanbul in 1955. Today, in all of Turkey, there are only 4,000 Orthodox Christians left.” The figures quoted by Simon refer only to Greeks.

“I have visited the prime minister, many ministers, submitting our problems…asking to help us,” Patriarch Bartholomew told Simon. He never got a response.

“60 Minutes” further reported on its website that “Turkish authorities have seized Christian properties and closed Christian churches, monasteries, and schools.” The Greek “parishioners are afraid that the authorities want to force Bartholomew and his church—the oldest of all Christian churches—out of Turkey.” The Turkish government “would be happy to see the patriarchate extinguished or moving abroad, but our belief is that it will never happen,” Bartholomew told Simon.

Periodically, the harassment of Greeks and other minorities becomes deadly, as was the case with Armenian journalist Hrant Dink who was assassinated in January 2007 in front of his Istanbul newspaper office. In fact, just as Simon was ending his tour of the Greek Patriarchate’s headquarters, a Turkish policeman reported that there was a threat on Bartholomew’s life. Previous threats had been serious enough for the Turkish authorities to place cameras and barbed wire around the patriarchate and provide the patriarch with 24-hour protection.

Simon was soon to uncover that despite its Islamist façade, Prime Minister Erdogan’s government routinely violates the tolerance preached by the Prophet Muhammad who had written a letter to the Greek monastery on Mt. Sinai almost 1,400 years ago, offering protection and religious freedom to Christians. Simon lamented the fact that Muhammad’s message of goodwill had not been put into practice by the Turkish authorities. The Halki School of Theology, the only Greek Orthodox seminary in Turkey, was closed down by the government in 1971. Since Turkish law requires that all priests and patriarchs be native Turkish citizens, the shutting down of the seminary made the training of new priests impossible, jeopardizing the church’s continued existence in Turkey.

Unfortunately, CBS completely ignored the fate of Armenians and other persecuted minorities in Turkey, never once mentioning any of them. In fact, Simon seemed to deliberately ignore their existence.

In one particular segment of the program discussing the location of the Greek Patriarchate in Istanbul, Simon went as far as describing the neighborhood as having been “Greek and Christian.” This was yet another attempt to avoid acknowledging the Armenians. Without diverting attention from the trials and tribulations of the Greek Orthodox Church in Turkey, Simon could have made a passing reference to Armenians—the country’s largest Christian minority—who also suffered many injustices, including genocide!

Readers are urged to post a comment on the CBS website, praising the network’s outstanding expose of the abuses and persecutions experienced by the Ecumenical Patriarch and his flock in Turkey. Readers should also inquire as to why there was not a single mention of Armenians or other minorities who have also suffered under the Turkish yoke. To post a comment, visit http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?...video#comments.

Link

[Armanen]

Re: Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

Please everyone, do as Mr. Sassounyan suggested and post comments to the video, asking CBS why they chose to ignore the plight of the largest Christian minority in turkey, the Armenians.

[Jos]

Re: Can Turkey Learn Tolerance?

[QUOTE=Alexandros;287871]

Read again: "the Turkish courts’ refusal to register its real property in the land register under its name("GREEK"...)":


Read again:

Turkey doesn`t let the Greek Orthodox church register its real property in the land register under its name and bars a church from starting a foundation. You are saying that these two issues aren`t related and that this have nothing to do with how Turkey treats its minorities? Oh my, talk about living in denial.

Alexandros, naming a church is one thing but creating a foundation is another thing entirely. According to the law, a foundation is treated as a separate legal identity that has the ability to start fund raising, acquiring assets and start educational institutions etc. It can be quite a powerful tool giving a minority group the choice to opt out of the current system of education and religious framework provided by the state. Yes, it is very much a constitutional issue and not something just directed a the Greek minority. I personally believe the government will need to relax their authority in relation to these issues at some point, obviously the sooner the better but it is not as simple as you might think. If it was, why hasn't the Greek government allowed the same concessions your asking for its own Turkish minority in Thrace?

Also, yes the Turkish minority in Greek Thrace may be better of than the dwindling Greek minority in Istanbul but I would say the comparative level of economic development between the countries has a lot to do with it. It's not easy living in a developing country and when you have the means and option of departing to a country loaded up with EU social benefits you couldn't be blamed for taking the short trip across the Aegean.