Wellcome back Musical...
Wellcome back Musical...
I had to reply to this provation gently. it is my right. Normally I did not want to add anything new, I have also other things to do.... What I wrote here till now had always had a base... I did not write anything that I could not prove. but I do not understand some... god god god!Originally Posted by milleniumcab
Wellcome back Musical...
MidtownGuy,
I remember reading somewhere, other than WNYF, about Turkey's stance on this so called genocide. They are saying lets open our archives and let others open theirs. And let the historians from all over the world, including Turkey and Armenia decide..
I believe, there are always two sides to every story..We should not make up our minds listening only to the side with the strongest lobby..
Turkey's stance seems reasonable to me... I don't think Turks are denying the unfortunate deaths of many many Armenians at the time.. I think they are challenging the curcimstances in which they died.. The word, GENOCIDE. is a word with a very specific meaning and I am not so sure whether or not it applies to this particular time in history..
I say let the historians decide the history not the governments..
Last edited by milleniumcab; October 14th, 2006 at 01:47 PM.
sure it is true. turkey does not say it newly but since years... but armenia does not and may be cannot accept it because they must be angry of how they can explain the murder their ancestors did against the turks.... that is the real problem....
TODAY there are 70.000 armenians working in Turkey and sending money to Armenia without any Turkish passport and without any work and residence permisson. They are working without any work and residence right in Turkey. Turkey believes however that in this shit world turkey should not arrest them and send them back to Armenia... BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE OTHER THAN TURKEY. THEY also SHOULD EARN MONEY AND FEED THEMSELVES and their families ALTHOUGH THEY DO NOT HAVE WORK PERMISSION IN TURKEY. That is something related to humanity not to law.
Another theme, may be you do not have any information about. There are turkish Armenians in Turkey everywhere. They are themselves very much angry with this latest shit of France, they also condemn france and french armenian diaspora and french armenian lobbies..... Turkey says many many times that "you are the real sons of this land, you are not a minority, do not be afraid of this latest french shit, you are our sons, you are our armenians. etc. etc." However, this latest France attempt against Turkey on the way of EU has created an afraid in between turkish Armenians... anyway....
Armenian Genocide Monument Destroyed in France
By REUTERS
Published: October 14, 2006
Filed at 7:44 a.m. ET
PARIS (Reuters) - A bronze monument near Paris commemorating the 1915 massacre of Armenians by Ottoman Turks has been destroyed just two days after France's parliament passed a bill that would make it a crime to deny the genocide.
A local member of the Armenian church in Chaville, a town near Paris, said the heavy bronze sculpture was wrenched off its pedestal late Friday night or early Saturday morning.
``Police say it might have been stolen for the metal, but it seems too much of a coincidence that this should have happened just after parliament voted the Armenia bill,'' said Stephane Topalian, a member of the Armenian church council.
Ankara denies accusations that some 1.5 million Armenians perished in a systematic genocide during World War One, saying large numbers of both Christian Armenians and Muslim Turks died in a partisan conflict raging at that time.
Turkey has protested against Thursday's lower house vote, which establishes a one year prison term and 45,000 euro ($57,000) fine for anyone denying the massacres.
The bill still needs to be approved by the upper house Senate to become law.
Source: the New York Times
Last edited by musicial; October 18th, 2006 at 03:04 AM.
EU Slams French Bill on Armenian Deaths
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: October 14, 2006
Filed at 12:09 a.m. ET
HELSINKI, Finland (AP) -- The European Union on Friday condemned a French bill making it a crime to deny that the World War I-era killing of Armenians in Turkey was genocide, calling it unhelpful at a critical stage in the Muslim country's EU entry talks.
The bill was approved by lawmakers in France's lower house Thursday, but still needs approval by the French Senate and President Jacques Chirac to become law. Turkey has said the decision would harm relations with France.
Chirac's government is thought to be unlikely to forward the bill for passage by the Senate.
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said ''we don't think this decision at this moment is helpful in the context of the European Union's relations with Turkey.''
EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said the bill came at a bad time as the 25-member bloc was trying to avoid ''a train crash'' in negotiations with Turkey.
''This law is counterproductive,'' he told reporters.
France, which is home to hundreds of thousands of people whose families came from Armenia, has already recognized the 1915-1919 killings of up to 1.5 million Armenians as genocide. Under the bill, those who contest it was genocide would risk up to a year in prison and fines of up to $56,000.
Armenia accuses Turkey of massacring Armenians during World War I, when Armenia was under the Ottoman Empire. Turkey says Armenians were killed in civil unrest during the collapse of the empire.
Source: the new york times
Musical, grotesque pictures of bodies do not convince me of anything. Of course people died on both sides, and I'm sure Greek Cypriots, the true Cypriots, can produce just as many photographs of mutilated Greek bodies.
You have posted many cherry-picked facts, which conveniently exclude anything that casts Turkey in a negative light.
You know as well as I do that there was a long, tortured history between Greece and Turkey. The Greeks were occupied for hundreds of years, during which countless massacres of Greeks took place throughout the islands. In Crete I visited a place where 600 Greek women and children were massacred in their hiding place by the Turks. The story is repeated over and over again. The Cyprus situation did not ripen within a vacuum.
I am not going to address each of the things you posted. I do not have the time today. Furthermore, my intention is not to provoke you. It is to inject a small bit of balance into what has become a thread of Turkish propaganda. My compliments, however, on your exuberance and zeal in defending your beliefs.
I would just urge anyone who is interested in gaining a more comlete knowledge of the Cypriot situation to investigate beyond what musical has posted. There are indeed two sides here.
As for the Armenians, I am less interested in the semantics of labels such as "genocide". I just wish Turkey would, just once, fess up to some of it's crimes. The Turkish government's continued refusal to allow freedom of expression among it's writers is just one indication of it's reluctance to explore these issues in the daylight. Instead, the Turkish policy is one of supression.
Just deny, deny, deny.
A nation with a government such as Turkey has no business within the European Union. Maybe one day, it will evolve to a point where it is worthy of such inclusion.
If you are going to talk about Cyprus and start showing pictures of bodies, don't act like those were the first bodies in Cyprus to lie bloodied on the ground. As I stated, there is a history of Turkish oppression on Cyprus that distantly preceeds the Turkish invasion of 1974.
From http://www.answers.com/topic/cyprus-...ottoman-empire
Cyprus under the Ottoman Empire
Throughout the period of Venetian[1] rule, Ottoman Turks raided and attacked the peoples of Cyprus at will. Greeks, the population of Cyprus[2] were given weapons by their rulers the Venetians and fought the attacking Ottomans.
In 1489, the first year of Venetian control, Turks attacked the Karpasia Peninsula, pillaging and taking captives to be sold into slavery. In 1539 the Turkish fleet attacked and destroyed Limassol. Fearing the ever-expanding Ottoman Empire, the Venetians had fortified Famagusta, Nicosia, and Kyrenia, but most other cities were easy prey.
In the summer of 1570, the Turks struck again, but this time with a full-scale invasion rather than a raid. About 60,000 troops, including cavalry and artillery, under the command of Lala Mustafa Pasha landed unopposed near Limassol on July 2, 1570, and laid siege to Nicosia. In an orgy of victory on the day that the city fell--September 9, 1570--20,000 Nicosians Greeks were put to death, and every church, public building, and palace was looted. Word of the massacre spread, and a few days later Mustafa took Kyrenia without having to fire a shot. Famagusta, however, resisted and put up a heroic defense that lasted from September 1570 until August 1571.
The fall of Famagusta marked the beginning of the Ottoman period in Cyprus. Two months later, the naval forces of the Holy League[3], composed mainly of Venetian, Spanish, and Papal ships under the command of Don John of Austria, defeated the Turkish fleet at Battle of Lepanto [[4]] in one of the decisive battles of world history. The victory over the Turks, however, came too late to help Cyprus, and the island remained under Ottoman rule for the next three centuries.
In 1570, the Turks first occupied Cyprus, and Lala Mustafa Pasha became the first Turkish Governor of Cyprus, challenging the claims of Venice. Simultaneously, the Pope formed a coalition between the Papal States, Malta, Spain, Venice and several other Italian states, with no real result. In 1573 the Venetians left, removing the influence of the Roman Catholic Church.
Social History
The Ottoman occupation brought about two radical results in the history of the island. Since the Phoenicians in the 9th century BC, a new ethnic element appeared, the Turks. The population of Cyprus, Greeks had now a new ruler the Ottomans.
The Ottoman Empire gave timars--land grants--to soldiers under the condition that they and their families would stay there permanently. An action of far-reaching importance because the predefined soldiers became the nucleus of the island's Turkish community. During the 17th century the Turkish population grew rapidly, partly by conversion. Most of the Turks who had settled on the island during the three centuries of Ottoman rule remained when control of Cyprus--although not sovereignty--was ceded to Britain in 1878. Many, however, left for Turkey during the 1920s. By 1970, ethnic Turks represented 18% of the total population of the island, with ethnic Greeks representing the remainder. The distinction between the two groups was by religion, and by language.
The Ottoman occupation detached Cyprus from the direct influence, cultural and economic, of the West. The Greek peasants were freed from serfdom and allowed them to buy the land they had been tilling. The Ottomans also applied the millet system to Cyprus, which allowed religious authorities to govern their own non-Muslim minorities. This system reinforced the position of the Orthodox Church and the cohesion of the ethnic Greek population. The Church of Cyprus was liberated because the Turks were afraid of the presence of the Catholic Church as it might instigate an attack of Western Europe against them. Gradually the Archbishop of Cyprus became not only religious but ethnic leader as well, something the Turks promoted wanting to have somebody responsible for the loyalty of the Greek flock. In this way the Church undertook the task of the guardian of the Greek cultural legacy which is partly carried on even in our days, although diminished after independence.
The occupation brought Cyprus directly under Ottoman despotism. The heavy taxes and the abuses against the population on the part of the Ottoman conquerors in the early years after the Ottoman occupation gave rise to opposition, following which the Sultan, by order addressed to the Governor, the "Kadi" and the Treasurer, prohibited the oppression of his subjects and commanded the officers to govern with justice. While the Sultan's orders indicated his goodwill towards the local population, the Ottoman local administration proved indifferent, arbitrary and often corrupt, taking no measures whatsoever for the benefit of the people and the situation was aggravated by the heavy burden of taxes. Those collecting the taxes were trying by all means to extract as much money as they could by exploiting the local population.
Following the Ottoman conquest, many Greek Cypriots and Latins, in order to escape heavy taxation converted to Islam. Many Greek Cypriots who had been converted to Islam remained actually Christians in secret. They were normally called "linobambaki". According to a view expressed for the first time in 1863 AD, and then adopted in the following years, this word was taken metaphorically from a cloth woven with linen and cotton and which had two different sides corresponding thus to the two aspects of their faith. The "linobambaki" turned up during daytime as Muslims, and in the evenings they appeared as Christians, keeping to the Christian religion, its customs and its habits.
The inhabitants of Cyprus, disappointed at the mismanagement of home affairs by the Ottoman governors, soon turned to Europe in search for help for liberation. Very characteristic is the appeal by Archbishop Timotheos to the King of Spain Philip II for liberation of the island, in which, among other things, the following is stated:
"There have recently been repeated cases of abuse on the part of the organs of the conqueror; in a greedy manner they attempt to confiscate and seize the property of the inhabitants; Christian houses are broken into and domiciles violated, and all sorts of dishonest acts against wives and daughters are committed. Twice until now churches and monasteries have been plundered, multiple and heavy taxes have been imposed whose collection is pursued by systematic persecutions, threats and tortures, which lead many persons to the ranks of Islam, while at the same time the male children of Cypriot families are seized (in order to form the brigades of "Jannissaries"). This most hard practice is the worst of the sufferings to which the people of Cyprus is subjected by the Ottoman administration".
Between 1572 and 1668 AD about 28 bloody uprisings took place on the island and in many of these both Greeks and Turks (poor Turks were also exploited by the ruling class) took part. But all of them ended in failure.
About 1660 AD, in order to eliminate the greed of the Ottoman administration and stop the oppression and injustice against the people (who they called "rayahs", sheep for milking), the Sultan recognised the Archbishop and the Bishops as "the protectors of people" and the representatives of the Sultan. In 1670 AD, Cyprus ceased to be a "pasaliki" for the Ottoman Empire and came under the jurisdiction of the Admiral of the Ottoman fleet. In his turn, the Admiral sent an officer to govern in his place.
In 1703 AD Cyprus comes under the jurisdiction of the Grand Vizier who sent to the island a military and civil administrator. The title and function of this officer were awarded to the person who paid the highest amount of money in exchange. As a result, heavier taxation was imposed and the Cypriots became the subject of harder exploitation. About 1760 AD a terrible epidemic of plague, bad crops and earthquakes, drove many Cypriots to emigrate. In addition what was worse for the Greeks and Turks of the island, the newly- appointed Pasha, doubled the taxes in 1764 AD. In the end Chil Osman and 18 of his friends were killed by Greek and Ottoman Cypriots alike but the two ethnic elements had to pay a huge sum of money to the Sultan and the families of the victims. It was assessed that each Christian had to pay 14 piastres and each Turk 7. The latter did not accept this judgement and broke into an open rebellion having Khalil Agha, the commander of the guard of the castle of Kyrenia as their leader. Finally the uprising was crushed and Khalil Agha was beheaded.
Greek independence movement
Many Cypriots supported the Greek independence effort that began in 1821, leading to severe reprisals by the Ottoman Empire.The Greek War of Liberation of 1821 had its repercussions on the situation in Cyprus. With the Sultan's consent, the Ottoman administration in the island under governor Kuchuk Mehmed, executed 486 Christians on 9 July 1821, accusing them of conspiring with the rebellious Greeks. They included four Bishops, many clergymen and prominent citizens, who were beheaded in the central square of Nicosia, while Archbishop Kyprianos was hanged. The property of the Church was plundered and the Christians were forced to pull down the upper storeys of their houses, an order that remained in force until the British put the island under their control almost sixty years later. When Greece became independent in 1829 many Cypriots sought the incorporation of Cyprus into Greece, but it remained part of the Ottoman Empire.
Between the years 1849 and 1878 Cyprus witnessed some slow change for the better in the administration section. District councils were set up and consisted of Greek and many Ottoman members. Many reforms, however, which were supposed to have been introduced were frustrated by unwilling administrators.
In 1878, Three centuries of Ottoman occupation came to an end. During their long presence on the island, the architectural remains left by the Turks included the small fort of Paphos dating to the late 16th century and largely based on a Lusignan plan, the tomb that was built where Umm Haram, a relative of the Prophet, died in the mid-7th century, which dates to the late 18th century and over which a tekke and a mosque were built 1816 adding Oriental charm to the place, the aqueduct constructed by Pasha Abu Bekr in 1747 in order to bring fresh water to Larnaca. In Nicosia, the capital, there is a 16th century inn called a Khan, a 17th century Tekke of the Mevleri or the Dancing Dervishes and the Arab Ahmet Pasha mosque of the 18th century.
In 1869 the Suez Canal opened, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland showed increasing interest in the island, which is situated in what had suddenly become a very convenient location. When the Turks were defeated by the Russians in 1877 and the Berlin Congress took place the next year in order to revise the treaty of St Stefano which was signed by Russia and the Ottoman Empire according to terms dictated by the former, it was officially announced on 9 July 1878 that on the 4th of preceding June, the British and the Sultan had secretly countersigned the Convention of Istanbul by virtue of which the possession and administration of Cyprus was vested in Great Britain. As exchange for control of Cyprus, the UK agreed to support Turkey in the Russian-Turkish war. This agreement was formalised as the Cyprus Convention.
After the Greek revolution of 1821 and the establishment of the Greek state, the Greek Cypriots expressed practically the wish of 'Union' with Greece, as it happened with the Ionian Islands and later with Crete.
This feeling of the Greek Cypriots began to be formed since the era of the Turkish occupation and was expressed later at the time of the British occupation. These expectations for 'Union' were expressed by the 'Ethnarchy' (supreme ecclesiastical authority, which represented the Greek Cypriots in the political sector since the first moment of the British presence in Cyprus). The development of the 'Union' movement of the Greek Cypriots was a sequence of the close ties between Cyprus and Greece due to the common cultural and religious history. During Turkish occupation the manifestation of nationalism was clandestine and feeble due to oppression. On the contrary, during the British occupation, the freedom of expression allowed by the British gave the possibility to the Greek political and religious leaders to nurture the idea of 'Enosis' (Union). The demand for 'Enosis' was initially propounded by the Church and then by the politicians in the Legislative Council, and the various committees formed for the promotion of the national cause.
midtownguy, you accused me of denying something, then I sent those photos and writings as reply. you are wrong in your accusation! you saw the latest writings with references inside and photos.... greek cypriotors make everywhere the same, like you.... accusing!!! accusing and accusing.... just accusing!!!!! these photos and writings are all available in internet....
living with lies brings nothing... one day the whole world learns about lies.... there are of course exceptions in hidding a truth but greek cypriotors' situation is not exception.... their lies will eventually surface....
Normally greek cypriotor's lies around the world and inside the EU caused turkish cypriotors live in poverty since 3-4decades. Normally they have to pay for all this to turkish cypriotors.
Please do not sabotage my topic. if you can write with proof against what I write here YOU ARE REALLY REALLY WELLCOME.
midtownguy, yoU ARE RIGHT . but you go beyond 400 years ago, you started talking with the summer of 1570, it means 436years ago.... it is over any more... god god god!!!!! Ottomans invaded not only today's Greece and Cyprus but ruled in three continent dominantly at those times (asia, africa and europe). it is over..... the turks had also been under invasion in some period in history..... These are the bad things for the name of humanity.... but what I say here is it is not good to judge today's people with the things that happened so many hundreds ago or to be able to judge a nation with the things that happened so many hunderds ago implementing lies to near history of last 2-3 decades is not fair ....
It is better we have to go beyond "Adam and Eve" and talk about it. who invaded whom.... my god.... what are you talking about????? Who starts this game???? Turks!!!! definitely no!!! Greek Cypriotors fences Turkey with obstacles everytime in EU. Armenian lobbies try to accuse Turkey of genocide...... Should Turks have defended themselves, they are getting crazy.... What is this????
Last edited by musicial; October 14th, 2006 at 04:54 PM.
The point in going back hundreds of years is to show the history of Turkish supression of Cyprus in particular. You posted pictures of dead Turks and presented it as the situation of Turks living in Cyprus without any reference to preceeding events, whether 50 years or 500. You just drop this load of pictures as if they're proof of something. You reference no offenses by Turks, Turkey was just defending innocent and helpless Turks on Cyprus. It was as if the hundreds of years long occupation never happened. So I posted about it. Then you are amazed and use multiple question marks as if I've performed an outrage by posting some material of balance.
You ask who start's this game. That's impossible to answer because each side will choose at which point in history to begin their analysis. Each chooses the point in time that makes their own side look most righteous. That's the thing about history- there's always multiple interpretations. Trying to discern the "truth" at some point has to become a personal quest, and your's may not lead you to the same conclusions as my own.
musical, instead of all of this historical stuff, which you provoked by making sweeping assertions about Turkish virtues, I am actually concerned about the current Turkish problems that prevent me from seeing it as a member of the EU at this time. You can continue this thread as a one sided defence of all things Turkish, but alas I can no longer play the alterego here.
midtownguy, you are right in the sense that the island has been invaded by Ottomans in 1570 but we are talking about today.
today there are two brothers on the island. As you probably know 1/4 of the island has turkish sub ethnicity. and 3/4 of the island has greek sub etnicity. BUT THEY ARE as a whole CYPRIOTORS. but greek big brothers of the turks on the island have beated many times the small brothers. Actually it was the greekish military regime on the island that did these ethnical cleansing actions. The whole world (including Greece and Turkey) wants to see ONE CYPRUS. To unite the island there took place a referandum with the leading of United Nations on the island in two sides in 2004. turkish side said yes but Greek side said "No". greek leader said the last night to referandum that they are rich, but the turkish side is poor and greek leader wanted from its public to say "NO" in the referandum..... BUT WHO MADE WHOM POOR with lies UNDER AMBORGOS SINCE 3-4 DECADES..... anyway.... divine law wins one day....
Turkey-EU talks process stumbles
Saturday, October 14, 2006
ANKARA - Turkish Daily News
Greece and Greek Cyprus have erected barriers to stop progress in the opening of Turkey's accession negotiations with the European Union in new policy areas, demanding that Ankara open its ports and airports to traffic from Greek Cyprus. (my comment: today nordern cyprus (turkish cypriotors) is suffering under ambargos caused by greek cypriotors' lies. and greek cyprus wants to get additional jobs from Turkey to use their big naval transportation fleet and to be richer and richer... guys, this is the origin of the conflict)
Greek Cyprus and Greece blocked one of Turkey's negotiating chapters, namely the enterprise and industrial policy, from being tabled before the EU's Committee of Permanent Representatives. The Greek Cypriot administration has announced that it would block (However, at the membership phase, I remember the words of greek leader, who said that "they use never a veto against Turkey. Using veto against such a big land (saying Turkey) is not a business of small States in Europe. This is a business of other big States in Europe", he had said) plans to broaden Turkey's EU membership talks until at least Nov. 8, when the EU Commission is set to release a critical report on Turkey, unless Ankara opens its ports and airports to Greek Cypriot traffic.
Remark: the blues are my addings to the original news
Today's Turkey discusses everything even Islam!
No religious wedding in Islam, says religious official
Thursday, October 12, 2006
An official wedding ceremony as stipulated by Turkish civil law abides by the rules of Islam, says the Religious Affairs Directorate's Yeprem
ANKARA - Turkish Daily News
Religious Affairs Directorate Religious Matters Supreme Board member Professor Saim Yeprem said on Wednesday there was no such thing as a religious wedding in Islam and that the official wedding ceremony as stipulated by Turkish civil law abided by the rules of Islam.
Yeprem said a religious wedding was something used to describe a wedding ceremony that takes place in Christian churches and is compulsory.
“There is no religious wedding ceremony in Islam in that respect. Just like everything else, if one prays to Allah and wishes for happiness, one would be acting in accordance with Islamic tenets. However, failing to do so does not mean an official wedding ceremony is null and void.”
He said in order for a religious wedding ceremony to take place, the religious official has the authority to act in the name of God, the place where the wedding takes place needs to by sacred and the process has to be a religious one. “All three need to be present for a religious wedding, and this is true in Catholicism. The church is sacred, the priest is ordained by God and a wedding is a religious process that cannot be violated. In Islam, there is no religious official that has the authority to speak in the name of Allah. There is no sacred place. One can pray anywhere. A wedding ceremony in accordance with civil law is approved by Islam. There is no such religious wedding in Islam.” He said the wedding ceremonies carried out by local imams during Ottoman times were no different from the ones handled by municipalities. “Local imams kept records, handed out wedding licenses and kept court records, and all these were used by the state. They acted like the marriage bureaus of municipalities in Ottoman times.”
To me, Armenia is still speaking demagogically!!!!
Armenian FM Oskanian asserts: Our aim is not to humiliate Turkey
Emboldened by last week's decision by France to approve a bill penalizing those who would publicly deny the so-called Armenian genocide, Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian has come forward with a new allegation against Turkey: "The fact that Turkey has not recognized the events of 1915-1917 as it should means that the genocide is still occuring."
Oskanian, who asserts that despite this Yerevan is anxious to normalize relations with Ankara, went on to say "It is difficult to say that things are going well just because France and Switerzerland have accepted bills recognizing the Armenian genocide. Our real aim is not to have other countries recognize this genocide. Also, we gain nothing from humiliating Turkey. For Turkey to ask for a special research commission to be formed while its borders with us remain closed is not a very honest or genuine action."
Oskanian's comments came in the "NZZ am Sonntag" newspaper on Sunday in Switzerland. He also said "The fact that Turkey has not accepted or recognized the Armenian genocide up until now means that it is still continuing. But, as this country's foreign minister, my duty is to look towards the future and to find a way to normalize relations with Turkey."
Monday, October 16, 2006 11:56
Source: http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks