Talk:Abdullah Öcalan

Fascism

This article is absolutely against PKK. You must be neutral in Wikipedia. This Text is 100% pro Turkish military. I will give a appeal to Wikipedia foundation.

Fascism means Italian Nationalism that was created my Mussolini and has no connection with the Republic of Turkey. First of all, the article says that Ocalan is a "leader" and it is the best you can get from this neutral encyclopedia because USA and EU named Ocalan as a terrorist. I don't know who you are but because of you and people think like you, PKK is still active, actually the only active terrorist group in the entire Europe, and still kills Military Officers of Turkey! Deliogul 22:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Fascism does not mean Italian nationalism, though that was certainly its first form. I am not saying that the Turkish government is fascist, but you are wrong about that. According to this very encyclopedia, Fascism is a political ideology and mass movement that seeks to place the nation, defined in exclusive biological, cultural, and/or historical terms, above all other sources of loyalty, and to create a mobilized national community. Just FYI. 72.255.68.35 12:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Just for your info: you have defined PKK, and its founder with your above definition of fascism. Actually he himself claims to be "armed" marxist. We have all seen how he had used his "arms". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.102.133.84 (talk) 14:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Page edit

i'm editing this page and have added the right information, please do not remove anything from it. the reason why i've remove so much stuuf is because it is false information by other website nad i'm addding the right information so please do not remove anything from this page. Thank You! TVLoverboy TvLoverboy —Preceding undated comment added 04:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC).

Page move

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved:

Abdullah Öcalan to merge with PKK

The Abdullah Öcalan article is a summary of PKK. Abdullah Öcalan should be a redirect to PKK and info in Abdullah Öcalan should be merged with PKK, as neither article is complete without the other.

• FOR -- Cat ^chi? 17:14, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• OPPOSE First, sign your comments...otherwise your request is useless and will be ignored. Second, if Öcalan is a notable figure (which he appears to be) he should have his own biographical article...one better written than this. —ExplorerCDT 16:31, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - Öcalan and the PKK are both notable enough to deserve entries. No value in combining them into a single entry. Guettarda 16:38, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. Both notable in their own right, separate articles make sense. -- Curps 18:32, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Opppose. Separate topics, each notable. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:34, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. Also, I'm not sure this request even belongs here. This project is for moving pages, not deleting them. Jonathunder 19:12, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)
• Oppose - Sometimes one just wants the biography. If they want the PKK story it can be reached from here, and vice-versa. Öcalan is important in his own right. Juanita 03:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - Not because they're "notable" at all. PKK continues to kill people while Ocalan is in jail. Each article should portrey the truth about them separately. --Gokhan 12:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose - Gokhan, worthy of note or notice; remarkable is what we mean when we say notable. A notable party/person doesn't have to automatically be characterised by excellence it can be characterised by distinction. Ozgur Gerilla 14:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

External links

Can anyone explain to me why we have the last two external links on this article? The websites are of course completley POV, but we link to such sites on some articles. But the presentation of them at the moment looks very POV to me as well. There was no explanation at all, just a warning that the links have some disturbing images. Now it reads "These images are a result of what PKK did.", which also sounds pretty POV and indicates that the links rather belong to Kurdistan Workers Party than to this article. I got reverted with the simple comment "good page.", which is IMHO not a very sufficient explanation, so I'd like to get a more detailed one here. --Conti|✉ 13:39, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

The links definitely belong to PKK page. Also, in encyclopedia people expect insight on conflict background more than pictures of mutilated bodies. Pavel Vozenilek 21:08, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

POV edits

To have a headline that read "Websites establishing Abdullah Öcalan as a terrorist" above the links to websites that is opposing Öcalan, PKK and the rights of the Kurds, is of course not neutral. To make it fair to both sides I would have to change the "Websites supporting Abdullah Öcalan" into something like: "Websites establishing Abdullah Öcalan as a freedom fighter". Supporting/opposing should be enough though. Also, why did you move the picture? Stereotek 17:58, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

If you read the context that picture belongs where it is, it was his capture, and the text talks about it. Opposing is not sufficient. There isnt an "opposition". When a country declares someone/some organisation as terrorist, they are at a state of war with them. US does not allow any activity of this organisation, in EU their activities are at best highly limmited. The websites do establish him as a terroist, Its the content of the website. What kind of a POV are you talking about? Your change is acceptable, I prefer you dont revert but instead improvise/rewrite. I dont want to do all the work :P -- Cat ^chi? 18:19, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Why did you delete this?: "Influenced by the situation of the Kurdish people, who were denied the right to live accoring to their own identity by the Turkish state" Stereotek 19:25, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Err? Thats POV. The claim of Kurds being opressed is POV. Kurds being not opressed is still POV. No need to mention POV, "right to live accoring to their own identity" what were they not allowed? Were people arested for talking in Kurdish? No. Were people denied the right to vote? No. Where people denied the right to be elected? No. Were they relocated before PKK's rise? No. Just what were they denied? Their lives are as restricted as any other minority/majority -- Cat ^chi? 11:47, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That the Kurds and their identity/culture was/are being oppressed by the Turkish state, is a fact and not a matter POV. Maybe they didn't arrest them just for speaking kurdish, but what if they wanted to start a Kurdish language TV Channel? A news paper? And what about something as simple as Kurdish names. Where the Kurds free to give their children Kurdish names? Stereotek 15:52, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oh now you determine facts. No sir that is POV, HEAVY POV. Kurds had TV stations. Most notably, Med TV, was shut after its clear affiliation with PKK, organisation serviced from Europe and some Kurds had it via satelite. After that they created two other stations, thats all Kurdish TV was. This came about after PKK. Same deal with newspapers. They had shows on such stations in Kurdish (what dialect I dont know)/Turkish/ and English. Kurdish names are NOT banned. Kurdish names are not banned either, foreign words like John, George, Newton, Albert, are not allowed, same in the U.S., when Turkish constitution was drafted Kurds were not a sizable minority. The famous "Kurdish" rebellions were based on religion not ethnicity. If Kurds brought the mater to the parliment before grabing arms I dont think this would be a big issue. Also Kurdish seperatists use "Kurdish" as a Nationality, you can have one nationality (unless dual), so this caused major problems. This is explained in the article I gave you on Kurdish people. -- Cat ^chi? 08:26, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Try to read this: [1]. It points out much of the racist discrimination that the Turkish state has been and are exposing the Kurds to. Stereotek 12:08, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Did minor edits in order to make the article NPOV. Again, too many anti-apo links, and not enough pro-apo ones. This is done on purpose to push a POV. There needs to be an even number of links. I will provide more when I get the time.Kassem 12:37, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Contradictory

In the beginning it says that Öcalan was born in 1948; scroll down and it says 1949. The other Wikipedias are somewhat split between April 4, 1948 and April 4, 1949. Which is correct? Punkmorten 16:10, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

CNN.com says 1948. Id say thats legit.--Pal5017 18:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

contradictory

on the current situation section it says that Öcalan is seeking a peacefu solution inside the borders of Turkey but right after that states a document(!) called Declaration of Democratic Confederalism in Kurdistan about a Kurdish confederation between some zones in Iran turkey and Syria.--Hattusili 10:17, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Umm...I read that and its surely not contradictory. Hes using peaceful means to create a Kurdish state. Thats what the document is. --Pal5017 15:22, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

It is strange after using deadly terror force and killing 30000 people,don't you think?I mean,If I pissed off Turkish Government big time and caught and only spared because of the new laws applied to appease the European Union,I would transform into a seemingly peace loving citizen.--CAN T 20:17, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Teröristbaşı

The article currently reads: "Öcalan... also known as Serok Apo among his supporters and Teröristbaşı among Turkish citizens". "Teröristbaşı" simply means "terrorist leader" in Turkish; it is not a name, but a description. A Google search shows many pages (15,000) using the word, but most use it in phrases like "Teröristbaşı Öcalan", "Teröristbaşı Apo", etc. Following the same logic, we would say "George W. Bush... also known as President among American citizens", which of course would be silly. For all I know, newspaper headlines may refer to Öcalan as "teröristbaşı", but again that doesn't mean that that is an alternate name for him. Finally, I assume that there are at least some Öcalan supporters who are Turkish citizens.... I would be interested to know what Serok Apo means and whether it, too, is a description (e.g. 'Our Leader') or a name (perhaps a nom de guerre?). Comments? --Macrakis 20:15, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know serok means leader.--Hattusili 11:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

It was me who added Teröristbaşı in there. I thought mentioning only the name that his supporters use is not neutral. So I added Teröristbaşı to counterbalance. Yes, serok means leader, president or something like that in Kurdish. Apo is simply a shorthand for Abdullah. Something like Jeff - Jefferson. And yes Teröristbaşı is only a discription literally, but it is only used for this man (there is no other use of it). Normally you would write "Terörist başı" for correct grammar. Whenever a newspaper mentions Teröristbaşı, everybody can understand that it is talking about Abdullah Öcalan. He is widely known as Teröristbaşı in Turkey. You're right about Turkish citizens supporting Abdullah Öcalan, though they would still understand that Teröristbaşı refers to Abdullah Öcalan. --levent 14:33, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

civilians

I do not understand why some editors have some problems about acceptin that the PKK attacked civilians--Hattusili 15:26, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

The point is that attacking civilians is/was not the common practice of PKK. PKK mainly aimed against turkish governmental forces. If we are about to say in this article that PKK committed attacks against armed forces and civilians (as if it targeted both), we should also say that the turkish forces also attacked kurdish civilians. otherwise, the neutrality is lost. --Hectorian 17:15, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

4000+ Armed forces personnel and 2600+ civilian killed by PKK. So you can't say Pkk mainly aimed against governmental forces.

Attacking civilians is/was a common practice of PKK, they declared it in their third national conference.--Hattusili 17:36, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I have never heard of this, and it is hard to believe it. if PKK had declared such a thing, it wouldn't have gained the support of the Kurds. and yet, even if they had declared it, it should be mentioned alongside with the attacks of the turkish army against civilians. Otherwise, the article is not neutral. i will either revert or make the appropriate additions --Hectorian 18:45, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

"Human Rights Watch strongly believes that, in light of the widespread and systematic atrocities against the civilian population committed by the PKK as a matter of policy under Ocalan's leadership" (from HRW's letter to Massimo D'Alema, November 21, 1998)--Hattusili 19:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

From the same letter to Massimo D'Alema that u mentioned and from the source that (probably u) added: As Human Rights Watch has often reported and condemned, Turkish government forces have, in the course of the conflict with the PKK, also committed serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, including torture, extrajudicial killings, and indiscriminate fire.. Thus, we come back again to what i said before: both sides have committed atrocities. and if u will mention only the one side (PKK in this case), u can be characterised everything but neutral...And do not forget that PKK is an organisation (terrorist or not), but Turkey claims to be a democratic state, so, atrocities on behalf of Turkey weight much more. --Hectorian 22:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

See also Village guards. - FrancisTyers 13:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

This is not Turkey article. If you search a little you can find out that infact PKK killed a lot of civilians. There was lots of killings of teachers, waylaying of busses, lots of killed babies. How can a baby may be in cooperation with Turkish government? --levent 05:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Were the babies specifically targetted? -- I doubt it. I imagine the Turkish armed forced killed a lot of Kurdish babies, but I don't think we typecast them as "baby killers" in the Turkish military article. - FrancisTyers 13:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

If they did not pull the trigger accidentally, yes they were targetted. The latter one is just your imagination as you suggest. --levent 14:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Because torturing, burning, and sexually assaulting children is much better! [2] Even so, I'll keep looking for sources, I'll let you know when I find some. - FrancisTyers 14:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Here we are, killing children [3], I wonder if any of them were babies... the search continues... - FrancisTyers 14:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Wow, killing a three year old! [4] The Turkish military sure are humanitarians! - FrancisTyers 14:56, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the children but the blame is of the ones who put those children in the front rows. --levent 16:47, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Much like the Turkish government is to blame for PKK actions by oppressing the Kurdish people over many decades... - FrancisTyers 14:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

We don't ask for your imagination, we ask for facts and proof. Each day people in Turkey are dying because of Apo and PKK. Each day we read a new death in newspapers or a new bomb that is found or exploded. Don't joke around with this. PKK killed a lot of innocent Turkish doctors, nurses, teachers and business people. They're doing drug-weapons-human trafficking. They're criminals. They're robbing their own Kurds in Turkey and Europe for food and money. They're accepted as terrorists by western world as well. This is an encyclopedia, not a hatred forum. You seriously couldn't support some terrorists just you don't love Turks or Turkey. If you have a grudge, do it like a man. You cannot just say "they couldn't give their child the name of Keje, so they're right to kill". Come on. Let's be serious. --Gokhan 14:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Way to make an ad hominem attack. - FrancisTyers 15:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

So I assume you don't agree :) --Gokhan 15:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you deny the Armenian Genocide? - FrancisTyers 15:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, this sounds like a rhetorical question, FrancisTyers;-) --Hectorian 02:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Why is that question? What is the relationship btw PKK and that issue? --Gokhan 04:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Why not answer it? Because you don't want to think of yourself as a genocide denier? I'm fairly convinced that your thought processes will not even allow you to think clearly about this for one second. The question is a simple test to see if it is worth us continuing this discussion. - FrancisTyers 14:29, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

You cannot judge my thought processes, you don't even know me. I hope you'll leave your prejudices behind while talking to me about this issue. I try to see some good faith in you, because you seem like an intellectual person. But I didn't like the idea of you testing the "worth" of people. Well it's your call (who is "us" by the way?). However let me try to explain my view. For example you seem to accept the armenian genocide, which is fine. But in good faith, that shouldn't automatically mean you'll also blindly support anything that will hurt Turkey or Turkish people, such as PKK terrorist organization or its founder Apo for instance, right? Will that make you a better person? Also, my sentimental outburst about PKK shouldn't automatically mean I'm a Turkish ultra-nationalist which will reject all negative points about my country. Believe me, I have knowledge on our country's issues. Anyway that's my actual thought process. And that's why I was sad to see your comments on PKK/Apo. I hope it's clear now. Can we continue the real subject here? --Gokhan 14:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way Francis, today there is a news article on Turkish newspapers. PKK planted a bomb targeting a bus carrying soldier's children to school in the city of Hakkari. 8 soldiers, 11 children, 2 civilians wounded. It seems PKK is actually targeting the civilians and the children. See news article. It's in Turkish but if your wikipedian pals don't help you I can help to translate. --Gokhan 04:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

It's funny when I read Turkish papers because when a bomb is planted who is it going to be? well, who can it be! PKK or amongst ignorants it was Aptullah Ocalan!. Can it not be another organisation, maybe another Semdinli bombing? No, the Turks don't bomb Turkey! You see there is two types of media organisations in Turkey one is working for the government which shows you one side of the story and the other types, the illegals, showing the other side of the story; so if you read both you finally get to decide what to believe. Forget the ignorance of the Turkish media. I mean, showing biased news websites as proof to your arguments is unintelligent because someone can post the other side of the story. The Armenian Genocide denial is a psychological proof that nothing is chanced since 1915 in Turkey and that sometimes the fundamentals of a country matter. There is a say amongst the Kurds that says "It was the Greeks then the Armenians and now the Kurds". Also some people have said that some Kurds are happy to be Turks. Those people are missing the fact that Kurds who accept being Turkish are either forced or manipulated. Ozgur Gerilla 23:28, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Ozgur, demanding cultural freedom is different than supporting terrorism. I think you need to grow up and learn that. Supporting violence will only get more violence - which won't help anyone in Southeastern Turkey. EU started to warn Kurds about PKK. U.S will have to stop its positive attitude towards PKK soon. Don't count on any Armenian or Greek support after that. And you'll live in this region even westerners will leave one day. --Gokhan 06:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

That's a personal attack. What you are mistaking is the cultural freedom doesn't just come to you. Especially, where in a country there is a passion to make everyone one race, Turkification. Since the beginning of Ottoman Empire, Kurds had no cultural freedom and any other freedom. So what you call terrorism is probably the only way, to some people, to make their voices heard. If somebody hits you, you hit them back. Just like Turks are doing it to Kurds and just like PKK is doing to Turks. We obviously need to read a lot more Gandhi. Lets not forget the ammount of help southeastern Turkey is or has received. You always put that the EU and US support has stopped towards PKK. EU and US has already got PKK in their terrorist list. Obviously putting down PKK is much important then giving the Kurds their rights and freedom for some people. An interesting thing about Turkey is that the country it self is suffering to make Northern Cyprus Internationally recognised but unfortunately does not understand the Kurds at all! A fact, Turkey always tells its people that it will never talk to the "terrotists" but how comes Hamas visited Turkey? doesn't this show something? Ozgur Gerilla 10:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

We'll see what the future will bring. Let's hope for the best. --Gokhan 11:07, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I am afraid this discussion page has been turned into somewhat bash Turkey as much kind of a deal. For those of you interested here is a fact:

Wikipedia is somewhat divided over the point of Terrorism. It is understandable given what is going on in the Middle East in the last few years. However one needs to remember to check the list of sovereign states in the United Nations some time. To avoid confusion read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid#Terrorist.2C_terrorism

For the rest of the discussion, no body here seems to know what they are talking about well. Bringing up topics such as alleged armenian genocide here is just irrelevant. If you dont have a clue then why dont you STFU?

Impartial sources about civilian issue?

The Council on Foreign Relations site states the below in an article (see article here), can we put this info on wikipedia article as well?

What kinds of attacks has the PKK undertaken?

Mostly attacks on Turkish security forces. But the PKK has also attacked other Turkish sites at home and abroad, as well as Kurdish
civilians who would not cooperate with the group.  The group called off a six-year unilateral ceasefire in 2004 and tensions have 
been rising steadily in Turkey’s southeast region as the PKK began resuming its attacks on security and civilian targets.

Terrorist

It's not right to say PKK is "by many considered a terrorist organization" it's not specific or a fact. You have already written "Öcalan himself has been labelled a terrorist by several states and international organizations such as the United States, European Union, Turkey, Syria, Canada, Iran and Australia" which is a fact. I'm removing it. Ozgur Gerilla 23:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

It's not saying "Öcalan is by many considered a terrorist organization", it is says "..PKK, by many considered a terrorist organization.." and it's true. If you need sources see PKK. --levent 08:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Same argument goes to PKK, it is a fact that countries listed consider PKK as a terrorist organisation but it's not right to label. Facts are better then opinions. Ozgur Gerilla 14:27, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Both PKK and Öcalan himself have been labelled a terrorist by.. . I think the grammar is a bit wrong here. PKK cannot be a terrorist but a terrorist group. Maybe you could rephrase this sentence to make it sound better. --levent 22:31, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

PKK is recognized as a Terrorist Group in its main article, by EU (Which also means over half of Europe), by USA. If HAMAS, Al-Quada, and Hezbollah are terrorist groups because Israel and USA consider them to be, then how come PKK is not? Therefore the first sentence should be changed to "Leader of the Terrorist group" rather than Militant. Korrybean 17:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

In Wikipedia we cannot label organisations as Terrorists. Ozgur Gerilla 18:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

People have to know simple facts about them though. "Kurdish militant group Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), recognized by United States, EU... as a terrorist organization". This will inform people more than "militant" will. Please remember I am talking about simple facts here Korrybean 21:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

That's unecessary, because the countries that recognize the PKK as a terrorist organization are already mentioned in the relevant article. Khoikhoi 02:14, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

For the record...

Öcalan can speak Kurdish, at least according to this article. —Khoikhoi 23:00, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

it says he was learning and spoke Turkish the next day. When he was arrested he could speak little Kurdish. Im adding this back.

Terrorism & Terrorist Tagging are POV & Subjective

For more details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SAR23/Terrorism_%26_Terrorist_Tagging_are_POV_%26_Subjective

SAR23 15:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. It was not a terrorist tag and it doesn't label him as a terrorist. He was only in a category says that he has been imprisoned for terrorism. What I mean is like you can be imprisoned for theft, even though you stole nothing. Though I don't really thing it is that important of an issue. But unless that category is totally abolished, this is where Ocalan should be included. RegardsKerem Ozcan 15:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Capture in Nairobi

I would like to read more about Öcalan's capture in Kenya and the alleged involvement of Greek intelligence services. I tried finding an article on it on this site but, couldn't. --Kimon^talk 16:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Just google with "Greek Embassy Nairobi Ocalan" and you'll find plenty of info. From BBC, etc, so you would believe. If you would like to know more about Greece's support to PKK you can check this page from Time magazine (again so that you would believe) http://www.time.com/time/magazine/1998/int/980330/europe.a_hellenic_haven.19.html --Gokhan 16:16, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. Now, as for the "so that you would believe" bit.... Where'd that come from? (feel free to post in my talk page) --Kimon^talk 16:47, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

People tend to discredit any Turkish sources as biased, regardless they are governmental, press, business or personal. Just wanted to inform you of the link's "objectivity" before you click it :) --Gokhan 17:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

"Northern Kurdistan"

Terminolgy such as "Northern Kurdistan" is not used only by PKK. Kurdish nationalists use it as well and, remember, not every nationalist is a terrorist.--62.37.184.189 (talk) 09:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Spelling of his name ?

I thought it was Abdullah Öçalan; maybe I'm wrong. Regards, Nikevich (talk) 16:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

It's pronounced "Er-ja-lan" and not "Er-cha-lan," so C without the cedilla is correct. Also, the turkish wikipedia article has it the same as the English version here. --Rajah (talk) 05:49, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Leader of Terrorism

What is terrorism? Is PKK a terrorist organization?

To figure out whether PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party) is a terrorist organization we have to first figure out what terrorism is. What is terrorism? According to its definition we can conclude whether PKK is a terrorist organization or not. From the top of ones head terrorism could be defined as committing of various violent illegal acts which physically or mentally harm the well being of an individual or group of people with the aims of promoting a political or religious ideology.

Another definition could be the premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant (civilian) targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience. International Terrorism, means that this group on its own or with closely coordinated others conducts the same actions in more then one country.

Or according to Bruce Hoffman's recently (1998) published "Inside Terrorism", terrorism is; "ineluctably political in aims and motives; violent-or, equally important, threatens violence; designed to have far-reaching psychological repercussions beyond the immediate victim of target; conducted by an organization with an identifiable chain of command or conspiratorial cell structure (whose members wear no uniform or identifying insignia); and perpetrated by a sub-national group or non-state entity."

The PKK killing spree started on August 15, 1984 where 2 police officers were murdered (Eruh & Semdinli villages). In the ensuing years 17,179 attacks resulted in over 30 thousand murders. 3,489 soldiers, 180 police officers and 1,144 armed village guards were murdered. Among the 4276+ civilians massacred were 501 children, 512 women.

You will agree with me that according to pretty much all definitions of terrorism PKK is a terrorist organization. I had earlier writen another paper on the results of some research including numerous clippings of foreign media, detailing the violence caused by PKK, please make sure you take a look at it if you are not sure about PKK's terrorist status. It is important to remember what PKK has done in the past to understand the mind set within which it operates.

With regards to Turkey, 2 terrorist organizations were listed on The U.S. Department of State, Counter terrorism Office's list of foreign terrorists in the world (released October 8, 1997). On this list are Revolutionary People's Liberation Party/Front, (DHKP/C) and Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) led by Abdullah "Apo" Öcalan. Another group not mentioned in the list but elsewhere in the report was TKEP/L.

According to a report by Richard Cole of the Associated Press; FBI & U.S. State Department records show that PKK committed more terrorist acts from 1991-1995 than any other such group in the world! International Human Rights organization, who criticezes some of Turkish policy has itself compiled a large list of PKK atrocities against civilians and sent it to the Italian Prime Minister asking that it's leader face justice.

PKK is a violent organization which has treaded on and violated 7 of the 11 major multilateral conventions related to countries responsibilities for combating terrorism & violence. Many of these call for punishment and or extradition.

It was a part of the G7 (of which Italy is a member) signed a declaration in 1996, which clearly states;

"We reaffirm our absolute condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, regardless of its perpetrators or motives. Terrorism is a heinous crime, and there must be no excuse or exception in bringing its perpetrators to justice. "

Furthermore the Ministerial Conference on Terrorism of Paris, France, July 30, 1996 specifically touches on this issue in its 13th statement point.

"13. While recognizing that political asylum and the admission of refugees are legitimate rights enshrined in international law, make sure that such a right should not be taken advantage of for terrorist purposes and seek additional international means to address the subject of refugees and asylum seekers who plan, fund, or commit terrorist acts."

Bombs were blown, people were killed, oil pipelines were set ablaze even while Apo was in Italy by his terrorist underlings. These were very likely were for a show of force by PKK, when Apo had supposedly called a cease fire. Still the current Italian government seems to ignore these points in its own internal babbling, or maybe its just soft on terrorism?.

Of course the Italian Communists like this "Apo" who was described as; "Öcalan is a Communist, complete with hammer and sickle, and he runs the PKK in Stalinist style, complete with executions and purge trials." by one-time lieutenant of his, Selim Curukkaya, in his memoirs. Who cares if Italian public are loosing billions in lost trade because of the public boycott of Italian products, who cares if the eastern part of Turkey still waits stabilization before investment can take place... And regardless of all the proof of Ocalan's terrorist activities he has been set free by the Italian court system, very likely a political deal within the shaky Italian parliament.

In an open bow to terrorism Germany, who had also previously labeled PKK as a terror organization (arrest warrants issued for Abdullah Öcalan in 1993 and 1998) changed her mind about extraditing the captured leader in fear of increased violence on her soil. Is it not interesting, that in the land of Germany where there are 2+ million Turks and close to 400 thousand Kurds they are afraid of violence from the Kurds if extradited but not afraid of the feelings of the 2 million+ Turks if he is not extradited?!

While the "peace loving" Europeans were doing all they can to off load this hot potato it was again the Americans who on December 17 stated bluntly that "if Abdullah Ocalan is allowed to go free without facing charges, it would be a blow to the international fight against terrorism". Yes it would, if it is okay to kill school teachers in Turkey what is the diffrence in killing school teachers in Italy?

This brings us to another important point which needs mentioning. Is PKK a materialization of the Kurdish people's voice in Turkey?

The PKK's main target has been the entire populations of all the villages which resisted it and the underlying infrastructure in southeastern Turkey. Indeed, the PKK indiscriminately murders and degrades the living conditions of the very people it claims to represent: the Kurds.

Even though the PKK was included in the list of "terrorist organisations" by Spanish deputy Lopes's special report on terrorism to the Council of Europe. And later on 25 November 1997 in the Mehdi Zana case, the European Court of Human Rights pronounced the PKK as a "terrorist organisation" thereby setting legal precedent! Time after time, the European Union public was tricked by Anti-Turkish & anti-Moslem lobbies within EU into believing that the PKK was the major representative of the Kurdish cause in and around Turkey.

This was due to their lack of understanding of the issues, historically motivated anti-Turkish sentiments as well as the newly democratised x-communist politicians who looked (in secrecy) favourlably towards a Marxist/Leninst/Maoist, the "proletarian internationalism" movement. These attempts disguised as human rights issues completely ignored the almost 1000 year old brotherhood between the Kurds & Turks who not only share a common religion but history as well.

None of the major Kurdish groups (KDP, PUK, KDPI) in the region support the PKK. In fact have time and time again fought against it. Yet because these groups are not as well funded as the PKK (due to its drug-traficking/extortion/money-laundering or its support by anti-Turkish groups such as Greeks) they are not able to be as vocal or afford long term large scale fights nor produce their own TV news programs. And the ones in Turkey have 2 options, either support PKK or be shot (with family members) by PKK. Either one is not a too bright prospect and hence the one sidedness of a small minority of the Kurds politically active!

There are approximately 9-15million people of Kurdish origin in Turkey according to your definition of Kurdish. If any significant majority of these people were supporting PKK there would be all out civil war in Turkey bombs exploding everywhere, fighting in the streets and all. But this is not happening! The bloodshed the fighting is taking place in the south eastern part of Turkey, the under educated part where the under educated unemployed peasants are the hunting ground for PKK recruiters. Whose job in the recent year has become harder and harder. In reality the terror is going down due to PKK's failure of its violent conduct of agendas. Hence you see a Abdullah Ocalan to save his own life, running to the west and disowning his previous lietuenants and organization actions as stupid and bloody murderers and terrorists.

Why is the east under educated/un-employed, what is being done about it. There are many things that the Turkish state must do to improve the life standards of its citizens, but none of them include dealings with terrorists. PKK has ruined Kurdish people and regions more then anything else in recent history. Not only by attacking industrial complexes but also by attacking the engineers, teachers, doctors and other civilians. There are pictures of PKK violence on civilians well documented. Some of these pictures are of the civilians mentioned in the IHR report some are newer ones.

Abdullah Öcalan and PKK is not a representative of the Kurdish people of Turkey if he was he would have millions of supporters behind him and not several thousand mis-guided, un-educated ones.

Terrorism, like AIDS knows no borders. The same PKK who kills civilians in Turkey with a bullet helps poison thousands more in Europe with drug-trafficking, extortion, arson, blackmailing and money laundering. Only by working together to make criminals pay for their crime can we battle terrorism.

Italy's failure to legally extradite Ocalan to Turkey or bring him to justice herself has earned its government bad marks, silenced its right to say anything if a Italian diplomat is killed or a civilian public transport bus is blown to pieces in Roma, and it will deserve no international cooperation! Germany's reluctance to extradite and honour its own arrest warrants forgos their right to complain about any future terrorist acts on their nation.

Turkey is literally a young nation. According to UN Demographic Yearbook of 1996 only 17% of her population is above 60 years of age leaving behind a large 83% dynamic group. Of the total population 29% are under 15 and are the future of Turkey. The country which they grow up in run by the 83% will point them in their future direction. Turkey is the most liberal example of a industrialized Moslem country, a model for other nations in the Middle East and elsewhere to follow. Just as a Euro-Alienated 83% can only guarantee further friction in between the east and the west, friendlier relations in between can mean a better educated, better off population which can only add to the competitiveness and stability of Europe. A stable bridge to the middle east and central caucasia. PKK is a terrorist organization by its methods no matter how you look at it and it must be dealt with accordingly. This is a test of Europe's fairness and willingness to cooperate with Turkey and a sign of its dedication to fighting international terrorism.

http://www.turkishforum.com.tr/pkk/terror_pkk.html

Copyrights: http://www.turkishforum.com.tr/pkk/notes_copyrights.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.182.227.193 (talk) 21:19, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Regions of Kurdistan as referred to in this article

"Kurdish regions of Turkey (called "Northwest Kurdistan" by Kurdish nationalists[25]), Syria ("Small part of South Kurdistan"), Iraq ("South Kurdistan"), and Iran ("East Kurdistan")."

This sort of language is entirely unnecessary and contrary to the Kurdistan article in Wikipedia itself. By labelling the different regions of Kurdistan as having been referred to by "Kurdish nationalists", the wording of the article attempts to dispute the legitimacy of these geographical terms. Kurdistan as a geo-political region exists and is universally recognised. Nobody denies there is a region called Kurdistan (although not a state, as such), thus those regions of Kurdistan located in the above listed countries are correct in and of themselves and not exclusively referred to as so by these so-called "Kurdish nationalists". Northern Kurdistan corresponds with that portion of the region known as Kurdistan which lies in Turkey. The quotation marks are inaccurate and unnecessary.

Whoever has locked this article must address this issue immediately lest I make a bigger deal of it than it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.35.102 (talk) 09:40, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Serok

I have just read the first paragraph. Does Serok mean uncle, not leader? Then what about Mam? For example, Mam (uncle) Celal? Kavas (talk) 13:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Serok means leader.

Introduction

I have not read the article fully yet but right from the introduction it seems as though it is written by those who support Ocalan and his philosophies. Everyone is welcome to edit, but please stay neutral and use reliable references. I used two academic sources which claim that he has influenced terrorism in the introduction; however, they have been removed. This is a fact, and very much claimed by many academics, and thus it should not be open to debates or editing wars. A fact is a fact, especially one which has so much academic backing of it!Turco85 (Talk) 23:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I have also included the Coucil of Europes Parliamentary Assembly Documents. It will be interesting to see if these reliable sources are deleted again...Turco85 (Talk) 23:47, 14 November 2010 (UTC)