Tall Armenian Tale


The Other Side of the Falsified Genocide


  Roosevelt-Atatürk Correspondence   
First Page


Major Players
Links & Misc.


Mahmut Ozan
Edward Tashji
Sam Weems

 The following appeared in the October 1983 issue of ATA-USA. 



The historical friendship of the United States of America and the Republic of Turkey goes back to the early years of the Turkish Republic. Below, we are reproducing the originals and reprinting the texts of two rather special letters. They are part of the correspondence of two of the greatest statesmen of the era. The first, written on April 6, 1937, is from the President of the United States, Franklin D. Roosevelt, to the founder and President of the Republic of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.

In the second letter, written June 6, 1937, Atatürk responds to Roosevelt.


  FDR's letter to Ataturk


April 6, 1937

My dear Mr. President:

A few evenings ago I had at the White House an exhibition of the moving pictures which were recently taken in Turkey by Mr. Julian Bryan. l want to tell you of my enthusiasm in seeing the many wonderful things which you have accomplished in such a comparatively short space of time.

I was especially happy in seeing the pictures of your good self in your home and playing on the beach with your little daughter. It has made me hope all the more that some day you and I will have an opportunity of meeting.

In my rare moments of relaxation I see the set of Turkish postage stamps which you were good enough to send to me. Some day I hope to see the scenes depicted on them with my own eyes.
With kindest regards and best wishes,

Faithfully yours,

His Excellency
Kamal Ataturk,
President of the Republic of


(Holdwater adds: The signatures are confusing... the names and addresses of the persons to whom these letters were sent are positioned at bottom, in both letters.)

Atatürk's Response

Letter to FDR from Mustafa Kemal Ataturk


June 6, 1937

My dear Mr. President:

I received with genuine pleasure your kind letter of April 6, 1937, in which you tell me of your contentment with having seen the moving pictures recently taken in Turkey by Mr. Juian Bryan. You also express the hope that you and I will meet some day, as soon as circumstances will permit.

Believe me, dear Mr. President, that I am very thankful to you for your sincere feelings and your appreciative understanding of the progress realized in modern Turkey.

I avail myself of this opportunity to express once again my admiration for the United States of America, especially since our respective countries cherish the same ideal which is universal peace and welfare of humanity.

It is also my earnest desire to meet you soon, and so I am impatiently looking forward to the day when I shall have the great pleasure of welcoming in Turkey your charming and powerful personality which has accomplished so many great things.
With best regards and good wishes,

Yours sincerely,


His Excellency
Franklin D. Roosevelt
President of the United States
of America
Washington, D.C.

Second page of Ataturk's letter to FDR


Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was to die the following year, and the potential meeting never took place.

Kemal Atatürk's letterhead logo

Kemal Atatürk's

I obtained information concerning Mustafa Kemal from someone who knows him very well. When talking with Foreign Minister Litvinov of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, he said that in his opinion, the most valuable and interesting statesman in all of Europe does not live in Europe today, but beyond the Bosphorus, he lives in Ankara, and that this was the President of the Turkish Republic, Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.


Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States of America



"West" Accounts


Armenian Views
Geno. Scholars


Turks in Movies
Turks in TV


This Site

...Is to expose the mythological “Armenian genocide,” from the years 1915-16. A wartime tragedy involving the losses of so many has been turned into a politicized story of “exclusive victimhood,” and because of the prevailing prejudice against Turks, along with Turkish indifference, those in the world, particularly in the West, have been quick to accept these terribly defamatory claims involving the worst crime against humanity. Few stop to investigate below the surface that those regarded as the innocent victims, the Armenians, while seeking to establish an independent state, have been the ones to commit systematic ethnic cleansing against those who did not fit into their racial/religious ideal: Muslims, Jews, and even fellow Armenians who had converted to Islam. Criminals as Dro, Antranik, Keri, Armen Garo and Soghoman Tehlirian (the assassin of Talat Pasha, one of the three Young Turk leaders, along with Enver and Jemal) contributed toward the deaths (via massacres, atrocities, and forced deportation) of countless innocents, numbering over half a million. What determines genocide is not the number of casualties or the cruelty of the persecutions, but the intent to destroy a group, the members of which are guilty of nothing beyond being members of that group. The Armenians suffered their fate of resettlement not for their ethnicity, having co-existed and prospered in the Ottoman Empire for centuries, but because they rebelled against their dying Ottoman nation during WWI (World War I); a rebellion that even their leaders of the period, such as Boghos Nubar and Hovhannes Katchaznouni, have admitted. Yet the hypocritical world rarely bothers to look beneath the surface, not only because of anti-Turkish prejudice, but because of Armenian wealth and intimidation tactics. As a result, these libelous lies, sometimes belonging in the category of “genocide studies,” have become part of the school curricula of many regions. Armenian scholars such as Vahakn Dadrian, Peter Balakian, Richard Hovannisian, Dennis Papazian and Levon Marashlian have been known to dishonestly present only one side of their story, as long as their genocide becomes affirmed. They have enlisted the help of "genocide scholars," such as Roger Smith, Robert Melson, Samantha Power, and Israel Charny… and particularly  those of Turkish extraction, such as Taner Akcam and Fatma Muge Gocek, who justify their alliance with those who actively work to harm the interests of their native country, with the claim that such efforts will help make Turkey more" democratic." On the other side of this coin are genuine scholars who consider all the relevant data, as true scholars have a duty to do, such as Justin McCarthy, Bernard Lewis, Heath Lowry, Erich Feigl and Guenter Lewy. The unscrupulous genocide industry, not having the facts on its side, makes a practice of attacking the messenger instead of the message, vilifying these professors as “deniers” and "agents of the Turkish government." The truth means so little to the pro-genocide believers, some even resort to the forgeries of the Naim-Andonian telegrams or sources  based on false evidence, as Franz Werfel’s The Forty Days of Musa Dagh. Naturally, there is no end to the hearsay "evidence" of the prejudiced pro-Christian people from the period, including missionaries and Near East Relief representatives, Arnold Toynbee, Lord Bryce, Lloyd George, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, and so many others. When the rare Westerner opted to look at the issues objectively, such as Admirals Mark Bristol and Colby Chester, they were quick to be branded as “Turcophiles” by the propagandists. The sad thing is, even those who don’t consider themselves as bigots are quick to accept the deceptive claims of Armenian propaganda, because deep down people feel the Turks are natural killers and during times when Turks were victims, they do not rate as equal and deserving human beings. This is the main reason why the myth of this genocide has become the common wisdom.