history is not interpretation. there are facts. and against the facts i posted you are just coming with opininons. you said that şeyh said had nothing to do with foreign powers even though it was exactly the opposite.

if the whole thing was about a swap to turkish nationalism why didnt the laz, suryani, rum rebel? there were mor arabs than zazas at that time in turkey. why didnt they rebel?

"When Ankara  returned caliphate back to SArabia, that was the last straw for some Kurds." ----> what are you even talking about? turkey never returned calphate back to arabia. they destroyed it. this bit of info pretty much shows that you dont know what you are talking about.

Abdülmecid II, (with various alternate spellings, including Abdul Mejid, Aakhir Khalifatul Muslimeen Sultan Abd-ul-Mejid and Abdul Medjit (Turkish: Abdülmecit; Ottoman Turkish: عبد المجید الثانی, Abdâlmecid el-Sâni  ( 29/30 May 1868 – 23 August/23 September 1944; reigned 19 November 1922 – 3 March 1924)) was the last Caliph of Islam from the Ottoman Dynasty, nominally the 37th Head of the Ottoman Imperial House from 1922 to 1924.

A last attempt at restoring the caliphal office and style with ecumenical recognition was made by al-Husayn ibn `Ali al-Hashimi, King of Hejaz and Sharif of Mecca, who assumed both on 11 March 1924 and held them until 3 October 1924, when he passed the kingship to his son `Ali ibn al-Husayn al-Hashimi, who did not adopt the caliphal office and style.^[17]

"
In 1924 March, using Kurdish language in courts were banned. At the same time Kurdish at schools were banned. Almost all Kurdish schools were closed. And at the same time education tax was put into action. Kurds strangely, started to pay education tax for their closed schools."

seriously where do you get all this nonsense from? cite me with your sources. march 24 is when all the medrese and ocak were connected to the central ministry of education. kurdish was not outlawed. for kurdish to be outlawed there should have been the word "kurdish" is the constitution. there is no such thing in the book sadly. the only time kurdish was outlawed was at the time of kenan evren. he describes his "mistake" like this:

"Evren’le söyleşiyi 2007 yılında, 12 Eylül’den 27 yıl sonra yapmıştım. Evren Paşa’nın pişmanlık duyduğu konu Kürtçeyi yasaklamasıydı.

-Anlatayım: 12 Eylül’de bir hatamız da oydu. Kürtçe konuşmayı yasakladık. Şöyle yasakladık: Konuşmalarda, mitinglerde, şurada burada Kürtçe konuşulmayacak. Okulda filan Kürtçe tedrisat yapılamaz. Neden dedik? Ben Devlet Başkanı’yken bir köyde ilkokula gittim. Üçüncü sınıfa mı dördüncü sınıfa mı girdim, hatırlamıyorum. Açtım kitabı, oku şunu, dedim çocuğa. ‘Kem-küm’ çoçuk okuyamıyor. Kızdım. Orada söyledim. Öğretmene döndüm; ‘Dördüncü sınıfa gelmiş Türkçeyi okuyamıyor, bu nasıl iş?’ dedim. Sonradan anlaşıldı ki, öğretmen de Kürt. Kürtçe yapıyor tedrisatı. Döndüm ve Kürtçe yasağını koyduk, Kürtçe tedrisat yapılamaz dedik. Ama biraz ağır yasak koyduk. Sonra bu yasak kaldırıldı, ama hataydı. Hata olduğunu sonradan anladım."

please know the history better yourself before trying to teach it to me.

Firstly, I didnt send my post to defence "somebodies". I sent it to show who did ban kurdish official in 1940´s. Actually kurdish looks like an Indian. The people who is living in India talks indian although they cant understand eachothers, because of their accent, that´s why they have partner and offical language like English. Because their goverment can not understand his citizens even want to help them and kurdish is a same with Indian. Im living in Istanbul and in daily life im hearing kurdish from people who is living arround of me. When i pay attantion to their conversation most of words are Turkish. So, their language is connect to Turkish also. They are trying to show as if different  using with X, W, Q .

 I wonder when they take off Turkish words from kurdish, how will they contact with others ?

Sheikh Sait rebellion did not have anything with any foreign powers. Not only Sheikh Sait rebellion, almost none of them had anything to do with foreigners. These lies were told by the state and most of us believed them. The state decieved all of us. The biggest betrayel will be(or is) felt by  the ones who believed with their whole heart. Your second president of Turkey told you that Turks did not find any evidence to connect Sheikh Sait rebellion to  British!! There is no need to go on further this. (Only evidence about this are a few catalogs sent to Sheikh Said from some arm dealers of the UK. So what? A few greedy arm dealers wanted to sell weapons to Sheikh Said. They would sell arms to even satan as long as they get paid).

Calipha back to S Arabia? I have to give the credit to your correction. You are right. Turkey has never returned the caliphate back , just abolished it.  But however, it does not change the fact that abolishing Caliphate was one of the reasons for the rebellion.

The words  Kurd and Kurdistan were banned in March 1924 as well as Kurdish language in schools.   in 1925  famous ´sark islahat plani´ (http://nedir.net/sark-islahat-plani.html) comes along. And after that anybody speaking Kurdish would pay a penalty fee for each word.  This is the fact. You can check these with all historians. You can not change these things. Kenan Evren is a spring chicken as far as assimilation policies are concerned.

Living with less lies is always better.

Yes, it is PKK and PKK is a guerrilla organization.They are our terrorists and now they are the ones leaving Turkey with an agreement.

We still dont know 100% what Kurds will get in return. I think there is promise of a proper democracy in which everybody can benefit. They also want some EU laws applied to them such as stronger local governments (ie like the UK for example) where they can elect their own people and they can control the police. They want the EU chapters for local self-governments chapters to be applied to themselves as well. I think they also are talking about a kind of recognition in the constitution.

But of course there is nothing offical. Or even if there is something written we dont know fully. Not yet. One thing for sure was that Kurds were not asking for seperation.

Erdogan´s presidency and Kurds.. That is almost exactly the question I asked a professor here several weeks ago. My question was ´why would erdogan risk it with kurds rather than making up with the nationalists as he was doing in last year?´. His answer was: a- He wants to be written in history b-He tried it with the nationalists but he realized they wont support his presidency. He has 45% and if he can secure more than 6% from the Kurds he can get his presidency through.  That is his aim.

Apart from all, there are also other regional pradigms. Iran is scary. Iran is closer to shia government of Irak. Kurds in the north is not getting on well with Bagdat. Because they want to use the oil money for themselves. The pipeline is going through Turkey. And Turkey is very close with Kurds in the north of Irak. North of Syria is a Kurdish area too.. Rumors say that Turkey is playing big. A Turkey which solved her Kurdish problem  in inland is very appealing to the Kurds in Northern Irak and Syria. More appealing then the Shia government in Bagdat. They say that once the PKK problem went away and Syria question is resolved, the borders will be no more between Turkey and Syria and Irak in reality. 

You keep saying this as if by not asking for seperation Kurds do Turks a big favour   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHGVz5iEY_Q

Hahaha

Of course they do!!

Because, if we dont learn how to live with others, the stubborness will leave us, Turks, only  Sogut and Domanic.

"Sheikh Sait rebellion did not have anything with any foreign powers. Not only Sheikh Sait rebellion, almost none of them had anything to do with foreigners. These lies were told by the state and most of us believed them. "

Didnt I already provide you proof that the perteprators of şeyh sait rebellion were the same squad that were assembled by the british in kürt teali? and that kürt teali is mentioned by the british intelligence as something that is formed to stand as s destructive force agains the ottoman empire? you know very well that he british fueled every single country and land in arabia and middle east and conquered the ottoman empire piece by piece. and so they did the same up till musul/kerkük and hatay. ottomans fought them and armenia in the east with kazım karabekir.

"The state decieved all of us. The biggest betrayel will be(or is) felt by  the ones who believed with their whole heart."

my sources are all foreign.

"Your second president of Turkey told you that Turks did not find any evidence to connect Sheikh Sait rebellion to  British!"

thought you said the state deceived and betrayed us?

"There is no need to go on further this."

first you said that the şeh sait rebellion was the result of outlawing of kurdish. but actually the proof that you claim (şark ıslahat) is done AFTER the şeyh sait rebellion. you lose more and more credibility in my eyes.

"(Only evidence about this are a few catalogs sent to Sheikh Said from some arm dealers of the UK. So what? A few greedy arm dealers wanted to sell weapons to Sheikh Said. They would sell arms to even satan as long as they get paid)."

during 1920s this is more than enough proof and reason where the grand independant weapon dealing comapnies didnt exist yet. you cannot conclude history with todays conditions. you need to study them in their own conditions. an exampe to this can be given by the russian weapon smuggle to turkey during independence war. the weapon smuggle didnt start until the moskova agreement, when the goals of russia and turkey had become common goals against the british and the french. the weapon transfer to turkey was seen as a serious offence by the british. during a world war you dont sell weapons to both countries. every country gives its wepons to its ally countries since theres a shortage in weapons. weapon production and trade were all governmental at those times.

"Calipha back to S Arabia? I have to give the credit to your correction. You are right. Turkey has never returned the caliphate back , just abolished it.  But however, it does not change the fact that abolishing Caliphate was one of the reasons for the rebellion."

it does. you made it sound like the calphate being taken away from the kurds who were under the rule of ottoman empire and given to arabs without their consulation and as if that caused a disturbence. its not. şeyh sait was a hardcore Islamist. he wasnt about nationalism.

"The words  Kurd and Kurdistan were banned in March 1924 as well as Kurdish language in schools."  

i dont see something like that even in your so called link to the şark ıslahat planı.

"in 1925  famous ´sark islahat plani´ (http://nedir.net/sark-islahat-plani.html) comes along. And after that anybody speaking Kurdish would pay a penalty fee for each word.  This is the fact."

i said give source. your link is.. just a link. doesnt cite to any official document. actually i asked you on purpose since there is not actual historical validity of the contents of şark ıslahat planı. its a pop culture kurdish nationalist thing, claimed by several popularist autors and columnists.

there is however a historical document called the lozan agreement:

PROTECTION OF MINORITIES.
ARTICLE 37.

Turkey undertakes that the stipulations contained in Articles 38 to 44 shall be recognised as fundamental laws, and that no law, no regulation, nor official action shall conflict or interfere with these stipulations, nor shall any law, regulation, nor official action prevail over them.

ARTICLE 38.

The Turkish Government undertakes to assure full and complete protection of life and liberty to ali inhabitants of Turkey without distinction of birth, nationality, language, race or religion.

All inhabitants of Turkey shall be entitled to free exercise, whether in public or private, of any creed, religion or belief, the observance of which shall not be incompatible with public order and good morals

link

that article was added in by the turkish delegate btw

"You can check these with all historians. You can not change these things."

oh believe me this conversation has taken place many times before. youre not the first one to fall for this delusion.

"Kenan Evren is a spring chicken as far as assimilation policies are concerned."

he is the first one.

"Living with less lies is always better."

than stop lying.

if you look at this link which shows the ottoman empires collapse history you will see that in every agreement and state of aggression you will see the the rivals of the ottoman empire demanding rights of minorities again and again, bringing this on the table in every single agreement. minority minority minority. no this is not a new thing you are right. the foreign agitation of the minorities in the ottoman empire has been going on for a really long time.

"I. Dünya Savaşı sonunda yapılan anlaşmalar ve barışın korunmasına veya uzun bir dönem sürdürülebilmesi için kurulan Milletler Cemiyeti, işlevinin büyük bir kısmını da ulus devletlerin bütünlüğü üzerine geliştirmiştir. Bununla beraber 1920 yılından sonra, Avrupa devletleri, kendi aralarında akraba devlet konumunda olmaları nedeniyle, birbirlerinin topraklarında yaşayan azınlıkların haklarının korunması yönünde ikili anlaşmalar yapmışlardır. Yapılan bu anlaşmaların görünen yüzü, azınlıkların hak ve hukuklarının korunması olsa da esas sebep azınlıkların, diğer bir devletin ulus devlet sistemini zedelemeye yönelik faaliyetlerde bulunulmasının önlenmesi olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Bununla beraber, I. Dünya Savaşı sonrası galip devletlerin yaptığı anlaşmalara ilâve edilen azınlıklar ile ilgili düzenlemeler ile 1920 sonrası ikili bazda azınlıkların korunmasına yönelik yapılan anlaşmalar; Avrupa bazında ilk defa “Azınlık Koruma Rejimi”ni ortaya çıkarmıştır."

At the outbreak of the First World War Lawrence was a university post-graduate researcher who had for years travelled extensively within the Ottoman Empire provinces of the Levant (Transjordan and Palestine) and Mesopotamia (Syria and Iraq) under his own name. As such he had become known to the Ottoman Interior Ministry authorities and their German technical advisors, travelling over the German-designed, built, and financed railways during the course of his research.^[18]

The Arab Bureau of Britain´s Foreign Office conceived a campaign of internal insurgency against the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East. The Arab Bureau had long felt it likely that a campaign instigated and financed by outside powers, supporting the breakaway-minded tribes and regional challengers to the Turkish government´s centralised rule of their empire, would pay great dividends in the diversion of effort that would be needed to meet such a challenge. The Arab Bureau had recognised the strategic value of what is today called the "asymmetry" of such conflict. The Ottoman authorities would have to devote from a hundred to a thousand times the resources to contain the threat of such an internal rebellion compared to the Allies´ cost of sponsoring it.

With his first-hand knowledge of Syria, the Levant, and Mesopotamia (not to mention having already worked as a part-time civilian army intelligence officer), on his formal enlistment in 1914 Lawrence was posted to Cairo on the Intelligence Staff of the GOC Middle East.^[19] The British government in Egypt sent Lawrence to work with the Hashemite forces in the Arabian Hejaz in October 1916.^[20]

During the war, Lawrence fought with Arab irregular troops under the command of Emir Faisal, a son of Sherif Hussein of Mecca, in extended guerrilla operations against the armed forces of the Ottoman Empire. Lawrence obtained assistance from the Royal Navy to turn back an Ottoman attack on Yenbu in December 1916.^[20] Lawrence´s major contribution to the revolt was convincing the Arab leaders (Faisal and Abdullah) to co-ordinate their actions in support of British strategy. He persuaded the Arabs not to make a frontal assault on the Ottoman stronghold in Medina but allowed the Turkish army to tie up troops in the city garrison. The Arabs were then free to direct most of their attention to the Turks´ weak point, the Hejaz railway that supplied the garrison. This vastly expanded the battlefield and tied up even more Ottoman troops, who were then forced to protect the railway and repair the constant damage. Lawrence developed a close relationship with Faisal, whose Arab Northern Army was to become the main beneficiary of British aid.^[21]

lawrence

here is an interview with apo by m. ali birand where apo says he received logistic and mnoetary support from foreign countries (also wipes his eyes with the same paper that he wiped his nose)

here is the newscast in the israeli government tv channel that shows israeli agents training pkk about the usage of anti aircraft

so please stop this very well known fact about pkk not being a foreign element. what you call as truth is a lie itself. i can come up with thousands of sources about this because its not a hidden thing.

I dont want to go over again and again.

You event do NOT know Sark islahat Plani. We discussed it zillion years ago.

http://www.turkishclass.com/forumTitle_29206

http://www.bianet.org/bianet/siyaset/107183-27-mayis-kurtler-ve-sark-islahat-plani-kararnamesi

http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalYazar&articleid=952102&yazar=ceng%ddz%20%c7andar&date=30.08.2009&categoryid=97

http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalYazar&ArticleID=1104843

14. Maddesini (sadeleştirilmiş Türkçeyle) aktaralım: “Aslen Türk olup Kürtlüğe yenilmeye başlayan Malatya, Elaziz, Diyarbakır, Bitlis, Van, Muş, Urfa, Ergani, Hozat, Erciş, Adilcevaz, Ahlat, Palu, Çarsancak, Çemişkezek, Ovacık, Hısnımansur, Behisni, Hekimhan, Birecik, Çermik vilayet ve kaza merkezlerinde, hükümet ve belediye dairelerinde ve diğer kurum ve kuruluşlarda, okullarda, çarşı ve pazarlarda, Türkçeden başka dil kullananlar, hükümet ve belediyenin emirlerine muhalefet etmek ve direnmek suçundan cezalandırılacaktır.

Lozan Agreement and Kurds?

In Lozan Kurds never ever considered as minority. If they were it would be a different ball game.

Sheikh Sait rebellion was started some nationalists Kurds. And they had nothing to do with the Brits. There is no relation what so ever!! What you are saying that ´they belonged to the same squad and the squad was established by the brits´. God.. The entire jon Turks movements were formed in London and Paris. Entire Ittihak ve Terakki was formed in Europe and had some sort of backing from the UK and France. were they all agents?

You can keep believing every single lie the state told you such as "Kurds are actually mountain Turks" etc. Nothing stops you personaly. But majority of Turks and Kurds dont believe them anymore.

And I also want to warn you about the language and words you are using. Getting more and more aggressive. Getting more and more provocative.