Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the 1980s, Iraqi Kurds were fleeing to Turkey for freedom and safety. The Prime Minister was of Kurdish origin. You could hear people speak Kurdish freely anywhere between the west and east end of the country. There were no "anti-Kurdish" laws and policies. The pro-American coup d'état in 1980 came with a law to control non-Turkish publications, but it was never put into action.
> There were no "anti-Kurdish" laws and policies. Here's a 1999 Human Rights Watch report – "RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF THE KURDISH LANGUAGE" – https://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/turkey/turkey993-08.htm
You must have a knowledge about the history and currency of the topic to hold such strong opinions. You should also use your own words to articulate your arguments, so I can keep myself engaged in this conversation.
Nevertheless, I've read the report. It misinterprets the government's certain actions to protect the public against several jihadist, separatist, and other destructive movements, which are not exclusive to a specific ethnic group.
It also fails to recognize the newly founded republic's goal to build an inclusive Turkish citizenship identity, and to provide a progressive and secular education program to everyone regardless of their race, religion, and gender while preserving the cultural value of each.
"Kurdish" isn't a single language anyway. There is a reason Kurds use French in France, English in USA/UK/Canada, and Turkish in every part of Turkey to communicate with each other, unless they're from the same tribe. It's not realistically possible to institute a system to provide public service to every individual without establishing a common ground.