From: sera@zuma.UUCP (Serdar Argic)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.turkish,talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.soviet,soc.culture.greek,soc.culture.europe,soc.history,soc.rights.human
Followup-To: soc.culture.turkish
Subject: If Turks had behaved like Christians, today there would be no "tamtams"
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 17:23:43 EDT
Reply-To: sera@zuma.UUCP (Serdar Argic)
Distribution: world

In article <BvFI2F.CoC@news.cso.uiuc.edu> ptg2351@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Panos Tamamidis ) writes:

>>Without realizing it, we fill important places in each other's lives.
>>As for democracy, had democracy really been an inherent virtue of the 
>>Greeks would it have dragged its feet for so long to come to Greece? 

> Yes, we know the reason.  We are thankful for 400 years of slavery
> under the barbarian empire of the Ottomams.  You should have known

Is that what they teach "paliks" in Greece? The following observations 
by Westerners were written in French by Ahmet Cevat: 

"If Turks had behaved like Christians to use force to convert to Islam the
nations which they brought under their power, to which no one could have
opposed, today there would be no Eastern problem. But Turks did not do so. 
They obeyed the word of the Koran to permit everybody "to worship in their own
way" centuries before Frederick the Great pronounced his famous dictum. Thus,
in an age when the Christian Europe itself shed Christian blood and when 
people in Europe enjoyed inflicting inhuman tortures upon those whose beliefs
differed from theirs, the Ottoman Empire became the sole country where the
inquisition did not exist, where deaths at the stake were unheard of and 
where accusations of witchcraft were not made. And the barbarian (!) Turkey
was the only country where the Jews persecuted and chased away everywhere
by the Christians, could find asylum. These facts demonstrate that Muslim
countries provided spiritually far better living conditions than Christian
countries."[1]

"The Turks, who are a conquering nation, did not Turkify the nations that came
under their rule; instead, they respected their religions and traditions. It
was a stroke of luck for Romania to live under Turkish rule instead of
Russian or Austrian rule. Because otherwise there would not have been a
Romanian nation today" (Popescu Ciocanel).

"Turks rule over people under their administration only externally, without
interfering with their internal structures. On account of this, the autonomy
of minorities in Turkey is better and more complete than any in the most
advanced European countries."[2]

"...human beings hate each other on account of religious differences. This flaw
is older than Islam and Christianity. But there has never been any examples
of this adjuration in Turkey because Turks never oppress anybody on account
of his religion. If enmity on the basis of religion had been such a case of
simple contempt among us too, or if it did not keep translating itself into
action, many nations in our Europe would probably have considered themselves
happy!" (A. de Mortraye).[3]

"Turkey never became a scene for religious terror or for the cruelty of the
inquisition. On the contrary, it served as an asylum for the unfortunate
victims of Christian fanaticism. If you look into history, you will see that
in the fifteenth century thousands of Jews who were expelled from Spain and
Portugal found such a good asylum in Turkey that their descendants have been
living there very calmly all through these approximately three hundred years,
and are only forced to defend themselves in some countries against the
cruelty of Christians, especially that of the Orthodoxes. No Jew is able to
appear in public during Easter celebrations in Athens, even today. In Turkey,
however, if the Israelites are insulted by the Greek and Armenian communities,
local courts immediately take them under their protection."

"In that vast and calm country of the sultan, all religions and nations are
living together peacefully. Although the mosque is superior to the church and
the synagogue, it does not replace them. Because of this, the Catholic sect is
more free in Istanbul and Smyrna compared with Paris and Lyon. In addition 
to the fact that no law in Turkey prohibits the open-air ceremonies of this 
sect, neither does any law imprison its cross in the church. While the
dead are being taken to the graves, a long line of priests bear processional
candles and chant Catholic hymns. When all the priests in all the churches in
the Galata and Beyoglu districts go into the streets and form clerical
processions during the Eucharist celebrations, chanting hymns and bearing
their crosses and religious banners, a detachment of soldiers escorts them
which forces even the Turks to stand in respect around the group of 
priests." (A. Ubicini).[4]

[1]  Ah. Djevat, "Yabancilara Gore Eski Turkler," 3rd ed. (Istanbul, 1978),
     pp. 70-71.
[2]  Ibid., p.91.
[3]  Ibid., pp. 214-215.
[4]  Ibid., pp. 215-216.

Serdar Argic

                     'This war quickly developed into one of extermination. 
                      We closed the roads and mountain passes that might 
                      serve as ways of escape for the Tartars [Turks] and 
                      then proceeded in the work of extermination.'
                                                       (Ohanus Appressian)

Newsgroups: soc.culture.turkish