Tall Armenian Tale


The Other Side of the Falsified Genocide


  How the "Thanksgiving Bird" Acquired its Name  
First Page


Major Players
Links & Misc.


Mahmut Ozan
Edward Tashji
Sam Weems

 Marge Simpson asks, which Turkey came first? From "The Simpsons"

In a March 2005 episode of "The Simpsons," the cartoon family found themselves aboard a Turkish freighter. Click on the picture to hear the burning question on Marge's mind!




The homeland of the fowl known as "Meleagris gullopavo" or "americana sybestris auis," is the North American continent. The 1494 Tordesillas treaty, forged by the Pope in Rome, granted the monopoly of commerce originating from the newly discovered continent to the Portuguese (as opposed to the Spanish). The Portuguese brought this fowl to their Goa colony in India.

"No wonder Ben Franklin thought wild turkeys were patriotic birds -- the male's plumage is red, white and blue. Hunted almost to extinction, the birds are coming back."

The Turkey: Another Genocide Victim.
Photo: Tink Smith, The New York Times

Circa 1615. Cihangir (a direct descendent of the founder of the "Mughal" empire in India, Babur 1483-1530, who was himself a grandson of Timur who died in 1405) wrote his Tuzuk-u Jahangiri (Institutes of Cihangir). In his book, Cihangir also described this fowl in detail replete with a color drawing. Since "Meleagris gullopavo" resembled the "Meleagris Numida" commonly found in Africa (especially in Guinea), and already known in India, the former became known in British India as the "Guinea Fowl." [See O. Caroe, "Why Turkey." Asian Affairs (October 1970)]. Meleagris gullapavo was then introduced to Egypt, a province of the Ottoman empire and entered the Turkish language as Hindi ("India," or, "from India"). 

When traders took a breeding stock from Ottoman ("Turkish") Egypt to Spain and the British Isles, the bird was designated "Turkey." As a result, the pilgrims landing on Plymouth rock in 1620 were familiar with "Turkey," when they encountered it in their new home. After the 1776 Declaration of Independence, Benjamin Franklin suggested that "turkey" —native of the land— be designated as the symbol of the young American republic. Instead, Haliaeetus leucocephalus ("Bald Eagle") was given this honor.

Translated from: H. B. Paksoy, "Turk Tarihi, Toplumlarin Mayasi, Uygarlik" Annals of Japan Association for Middle East Studies (Tokyo) No. 7, 1992. Pp. 173-220. Footnote 26. [Reprinted in Yeni Forum (Ankara), Vol.13, No.277, Haziran 1992. Pp. 54-65].


"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.