Turkish American Association of Minnesota (TAAM) President Engin Kalayci, Past President Serpil Metin and TAAM members host ATAA President Gunay Evinch.

ATAA, TAAM Team Up in Minnesota

On February 4, the Turkish American Association of Minnesota (TAAM) hosted ATAA President Gunay Evinch for a briefing on ATAA’s national strategy for grassroots activism.  Over 50 Turkish American activists from TAAM as well as faith-based and student organizations weathered the bitter snow to hear Evinch speak on the ATAA’s new Turkish American Board Advocacy Network (TABAN), Student Outreach, and Census 2010 SayTurk.  TAAM, a longtime ATAA component organization, will be working with ATAA on Census 2010 SayTurk to count an estimated 2000 Turkish Americans in the Minneapolis-Indianapolis metropolitan area.  As he had done at the Council of Turkish Canadians Youth Congress in Montreal in January, Evinch also visited with the local Turkish American community members, including small businesses and religious leaders.

President Evinch, Mapps Coffee Houses owner Erdogan Erkoc, FedEx owner Faruk Cingilli, meet with Congressman Keith Ellison's District Office Community Representative Miski Noor.

President Evinch also met with the leaders of the Somali American community, as well as Congressman Keith Ellisons’ district office, regarding the importance of defending diversity, dialogue, and dignity in Minneapolis, particularly since the Armenian American lobby was funding and promoting anti-Turkish activities in Minneapolis, such as the February 5 St. Thomas University School of Law symposium, “The Armenian Genocide within the Framework of National and International Law”.
The next day, President Evinch and TAAM members attended the St. Thomas University School of Law Journal of Law and Public Policy symposium to listen and express their concern regarding the underlying hatred of accusing a nation of people of the high crime without providing them a fair opportunity to defend themselves.

Journal Advisor Robert Delahunty admitted that the panel assumed that the Armenian case constitutes genocide.  As the day continued, Journal staff privately admitted to President Evinch that Armenian advocacy groups paid for the event and for the publication of the presentations.  ATAA interns were prohibited from handing out documents or placing material on the publications table that disagree with the Armenian point of view.  Law students complained that the panel was one-sided and contrary to legal analysis and critical thinking.

Zoryan Institute’s Smith attempted to rationalize the restrictions on speech, expressing, “We don’t mind vigorous discussion; we welcome questions.”  But the vigor was not there, as less than 40, mostly Armenian community members, and ten law students attended the event.  Moderator Roger Smith of the Zoryan Institute blamed the weather. But, Starbucks in the next building that was adjoined by a skywalk to protect pedestrians from the bitter cold was percolating with an abundance of law students.

President Evinch visits Turkish American businesses.

Next.  Mark Movsesian, a contracts law professor, read from a paper that argued that the roots of the Armenian “genocide” are the Ottoman Millet system and Islam.  Next, sociologist Vahakn Dadrian struggled to offer a definition of genocide that would forgive the fact of the violent Armenian Revolt, expressing that genocide is the final resolution of a cumulative conflict.

At 11am, there was a surge of approximately 20 law students who came to hear genocide expert William Schabas speak, and who left immediately after he spoke.   Importantly, Schabas did not refer to the Armenian case as genocide, but as the “events of 1915”; disagreed with Dadrian that the crime of genocide existed prior to 1948, disagreed with Dadrian that genocide is a Crime Against Humanity, disagreed with Dadrian that the UN Genocide Convention of 1948 could be applied retroactively to the events of 1915; made absolutely no reference to the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) over which he presides; and, did not applaud the other speakers.

Next, anti-state Turkish participants, Ziya Meral and Eren Keskin, exclaimed that Turkey should apologize for the Armenian “genocide” in a manner that includes recognition, reparations, and restitution.  Keskin, who is a disbarred advocate of the PKK terrorist organization, was not present because she was not able to come to the United States.  But, Keskin’s paper was passionately read by the president of the local Minneapolis Armenian American association.  During the live telephone Q&A period that followed, Keskin exclaimed that the Turkish Republic and Kemalism are based on the principles of the Committee for Union and Progress, that Turkey is a militarist society, and as long as it remains so, it will deny the Armenian “genocide” and commit genocide against others.  Keskin expressed that she “sees no hope so long as the Turkish military controls the Turkish economy.”  While Armenians in the audience applauded vigorously, law students rolled their eyes at the blatant extremism.

Next, Jurist Geoffrey Robertson, who was paid by the Armenian Center under the direction of Bernard Andonian, argued that Britain concealed evidence of the “genocide”, in order to have productive strategic relations with Turkey.   Perhaps owing to law school etiquette and the scientific method of inquiry, attorney Mark Fleming discussed the Griswold vs. Massachusetts case, in which ATAA is a leading plaintiff, by providing the facts most favorable to the ATAA, and by analyzing the competing interpretations of the law.  He did, however, fail to mention that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) intervened on the side of the plaintiffs at the Court of Appeals, a fact that ATAA President Evinch brought up in the Q&A period.  George Shirinian of the Zoryan Institute closed the Symposium, asserting, “Turkey must come to terms with its history by providing a sincere apology and showing substantial efforts at atonement.”

ATAA President Evinch reported that there was really no opportunity for dissent, debate or dialogue.  “The questions had to be written on an index card, and submitted for review.  I felt that the event was so blatantly one-sided, that the Journal staff eventually sympathized with the peaceful Turkish Americans, who after all were being accused of a high crime without a fair opportunity to defend themselves. "