The Ottomans

[Anoush]

Re: We are not empire seekers

Dear Anoush,

Just to avoid any misunderstanding from any readers, what I meant was that I didn't want to speak on behalf of any Armenian who would disagree, because unfortunately, the bulk of the Armenians and all non-Armenians think what's between Turks and Armenians is no different than a given case of two feuding parties like say, the Germans and the Dutch or the French and the English.

This is reflected in the attitudes of the Eurofags who say “why can't the Artsakh people agree with a broad autonomy within “Azerbaijan” like in the case of Ĺland Islands?”, not caring for the facts (among countless others) that:

I. Artsakh has never been part of an independent fake “Azerbaijan”;

II. Artsakh is free and there's no reason why the people who gained their freedom after 70 years of imposed subjugation should give up their independence and voluntarily go under murderous Turkic yoke despite their victory and the Turk's miserable defeat in the war they instigated;

III. Artsakh is no island and its present borders are fraudulently drawn by the “Azeri” garbage to sever this province from the motherland Armenia;

IV. the “Azeris” not only are no human beings, they are (at the moment) the most vicious type of Inhuman Civilization-deficiency Viruses collectively known as Turk, because they are at the beginning of their miserable existence as a “state” and “nation” however absurd these terms may sound in relation to such a worthless, reeking garbage residue as the genocidal, destructive “Azeri” filth.

Dear Hellektor,

I totally agree with each and every statement you made above, here and everywhere. As an Armenian patriotic individual I believe that you are truly an Armenian spokesman and the voice of truth on all the websites that you do visit. You know your history and the characteristics of our enemy very well. I read your posts and it always delights me to read your thoughts and brainstorms. A while back you have mentioned in one post that why Armenia doesn't do something when the azeri army dogs demolished in broad daylight our 1,500 Xachkars in Naxichevan. Then I just read above what you actually meant by it then. Meaning why didn't Armenia capitalize on it and fought for that part of OUR country "Naxichevan" to be our own again; it would have been a great timing for us and it would've made a great sense, but alas Armenia didn't do anything about it. How right you are and it's a sheer shame that we stood still. What did the Europeans or America do? Nothing. But we could have done something about it then by making it our own AGAIN. I thought then that you meant Armenia should have the azeris pay for their vandalisms and getting scorned by world powers. But you meant then a much better solution for us but we didn't capitalize on it.

I remember years ago my father used to read how the azeri dogs would mistreat and mutilize Armenian boys and girls in and around Artsax; then called azerbaijan thanks to another dog called Stalin. How can any Armenian feel safe around those dogy dog esheg azeris? And why did Armenia and Artsax's autonomy after winning the war agreed to sever the province from the motherland Armenia? Frankly I don't know that part of the history and I get upset everytime that I see the Artsaxian map separated from the motherland. Can't we do something about it and make it part of Armenia? We should; otherwise it's stupid.

[Hellektor]

Re: The Ottomans

I don't understand the necessity of an Islamic revolution in Iran. Had it happened in the Pakis' country or Saudi Arabia for instance, I wouldn't have been surprised a bit… See what I mean?

I forgot to respond to this. This is a question that I have been asking every single day since the disaster, yet I guess you see the answer in my previous post: it's this thing they have regarding women. It's all about women and covering their heads. This concern with forcing the hejab the way they like it has been a constant throughout all these years, though in the beginning it was a simple act of revenge on Reza Shah by Khomeini.

This psychotic obsession to cover the heads of women -see their “movies” and TV programs where they find a way to hide the woman's head even when she is supposed to be playing the role of a westerner- is unique even in the Islamic world. This is the reason for the “revolution” and it comes from Iranian culture. They had this in the Zoroastrian days and hejab is the literal translation of the Persian word pardeh (from pardeh sara) where they hid their wives.

[Hellektor]

Re: The Ottomans

I am aware of it and I'd like to call it 'similarities' but Christ can be defined a bit differently- by nature- than Mithra and Zoroaster. Anyway, I understand you don't believe in such "fictional ridiculousness "...

I wasn't talking about Mithra and Zoroaster. There are mythological characters in many cultures whose stories have been adapted by Christians in order not to sever their ties with their “pagan” past.

Gnerally speaking I am not a big fan of wiki especially as far as politics are concerned, I make an exception here:
Jesus Christ in comparative mythology

Check this too or do your own Googling

They all share the characteristics of being produced of a virgin birth, walking on water, performing miracles, being crucified, having been resurrected, etc. I am not against people who believe, I can't stand those who want to force their religious ideas on those won't accept their beliefs blindly; the intolerant, or what?

Ah, I should have known that. You know 'everything' is banned and 'nothing' is banned in practice...
By the way, je ne parle pas allemand, Hellektor.

C'est pas grave! Everybody knows what Achtung means, right

Khalayegh har che layegh?

I'm not a big fan of Shah either. (He just seemed to be a puppet) But it's true that the country's economic situation was not even comparable to the mess they have created for us today. Just imagine how much reverence others had for us, abroad... However, I don't understand the necessity of an Islamic revolution in Iran. Had it happened in the Pakis' country or Saudi Arabia for instance, I wouldn't have been surprised a bit… See what I mean?

I am not anti-Shah, he was definitely not acting as a puppet in the latter years of his rule. I am pro truth. Some people have pictured the Shah as a ruthless demon, what is total baloney and falsification of history.

One instance: there was this project introduced by the Shah, namely “Taghzieh Raigan” where every single day for all the nine school months they would distribute fruit, milk, biscuits or a cake in EVERY school all over Iran for FREE. He obviously wanted to see every Iranian kid fed well and he wanted to shut out the possibility of malnutrition and undernourished children in Iran. Is this bad? I have to hear a communist say ONE good thing about the Shah. They only associate him with SAVAK, but this free distribution of essential nutrition was a “communist” thing or what? I know for a fact that such a program has not been put to practice even in Switzerland.

Men and women were not separated anywhere not at school, not in buses, not in the swimming pool, not on the beach. There was almost no unemployment and everything was so cheap that anyone could buy a home after a few years from the start of their career. Women were allowed to sing, to travel alone, to wear whatever they liked. You had chadoris and women in mini skirts walking in the same street and I truly believe the “revolution” was because of this “excessive” freedom and a sudden surge of a higher middle class.

On one hand, the backward islamists and hezbollahis couldn't stand the modernization (i.e. seeing their women walking in mini skirts) and on the other hand, the expectations of the middle class that constituted a huge bulk of the society were growing unrealistically. I vehemently reject the delirious pretence of those (mainly commies) who claim the people were on to a socialist revolution and it was hijacked by the Islamists helped by the West and BBC. Pure, 48 carat, non-polishable, stinking croc of horse shit. They had their stomachs too full, be bakhteshoon lagad zadand.

Shah's regime did not allow political freedom, yet it was corrigible. We had 100% civil freedom (we have 0% now), employment and economic security. Shah was dying; in fact he died about a year after his leaving the country, so there was no necessity for a revolution. His son would be softer and more open-minded than him just as he was more open-minded and softer than his father...

[Lucin]

Re: The Ottomans

Christ is most probably a mythical character; he has not been recorded in history. Anyway, the possibility that a good man called Jesus (or Yahshua) who preached to the people has existed is not extraordinary.

The rites and philosophy of Christianity are the continuation of older pagan religions of the peoples who later became Christians. In this thread Armenian has shared his thoughts on the Aryan/Iranian/non-Jewish character of Christianity where you can see how many mythical personalities predating Jesus have existed on who the character of Christ has been modeled.

I am aware of it and I'd like to call it 'similarities' but Christ can be defined a bit differently- by nature- than Mithra and Zoroaster. Anyway, I understand you don't believe in such "fictional ridiculousness "...

Achtung! Shojaeddin Shafa's books are forbidden in Iran so be careful not to ask about his books, but you can find some of them on the web. Tavallodi Digar is available as typed PDF, the others are scans which makes their reading off the monitor not so easy.

Ah, I should have known that. You know 'everything' is banned and 'nothing' is banned in practice...
By the way, je ne parle pas allemand, Hellektor.

Well, I am just a little older! I was around before the catastrophe. Despite what they say and despite the fact that I was a mere kid at the time, I assure you that the quality of life back then cannot be compared with the shit we are in today. It was way better in any way you can imagine even compared to western countries. Shah did not like the commies and there was not much political freedom but no one cared about what you could wear, what you could eat, what you could drink, what music you could listen to, what you could watch... The wages were high, the taxes were ridiculously low, the services were almost free...

Khalayegh har che layegh?

I'm not a big fan of Shah either. (He just seemed to be a puppet) But it's true that the country's economic situation was not even comparable to the mess they have created for us today. Just imagine how much reverence others had for us, abroad... However, I don't understand the necessity of an Islamic revolution in Iran. Had it happened in the Pakis' country or Saudi Arabia for instance, I wouldn't have been surprised a bit… See what I mean?

[Hellektor]

Re: The Ottomans

I can't disagree with you. Paul was just an apostle, a human, a Jewish one, of course. I'd rather stick to Christ and take His word. I hope you won't say he was "King of the Jews".

Christ is most probably a mythical character; he has not been recorded in history. Anyway, the possibility that a good man called Jesus (or Yahshua) who preached to the people has existed is not extraordinary.

The rites and philosophy of Christianity are the continuation of older pagan religions of the peoples who later became Christians. In this thread Armenian has shared his thoughts on the Aryan/Iranian/non-Jewish character of Christianity where you can see how many mythical personalities predating Jesus have existed on who the character of Christ has been modeled.

Sure. Thanks. I gotta go to Enghelab these days so I'll definitely buy one. The title (Tavallodi digar) sounds so familiar to me.

Achtung! Shojaeddin Shafa's books are forbidden in Iran so be careful not to ask about his books, but you can find some of them on the web. Tavallodi Digar is available as typed PDF, the others are scans which makes their reading off the monitor not so easy.

*sighs* well, it's 24 years for me. I don't know exactly what it was like before 1357. But we still like her, she is beautiful and I have some fond memories in its every corner, don't you?

Well, I am just a little older! I was around before the catastrophe. Despite what they say and despite the fact that I was a mere kid at the time, I assure you that the quality of life back then cannot be compared with the shit we are in today. It was way better in any way you can imagine even compared to western countries. Shah did not like the commies and there was not much political freedom but no one cared about what you could wear, what you could eat, what you could drink, what music you could listen to, what you could watch... The wages were high, the taxes were ridiculously low, the services were almost free...

[Lucin]

Re: The Ottomans

Dear Lucin,

The Christian god has a dual character. As long as it is influenced by the Aryan/Iranian religions: Mithraism, Zoroaster and Mani and the Greek culture, it is a kind god, when it is the Jew god Yahweh, mostly through the writings of Paul who plays an essential role in the creation of Christianity, it is the vicious god of Torah, a bit less cruel nevertheless!

I can't disagree with you. Paul was just an apostle, a human, a Jewish one, of course. I'd rather stick to Christ and take His word. I hope you won't say he was "King of the Jews".

Do read Shojaeddin Shafa's books that are available online, if you haven't. Start with Tavallodi Digar that with a simple style explains all this, providing enough examples to shut up those who still have any respect for those vile Abrahamic religions.

Sure. Thanks. I gotta go to Enghelab these days so I'll definitely buy one. The title (Tavallodi digar) sounds so familiar to me.

In Iran, we have had it up to our necks for the last thirty years and we are sick of it to death, aren't we Lucin?

*sighs* well, it's 24 years for me. I don't know exactly what it was like before 1357. But we still like her, she is beautiful and I have some fond memories in its every corner, don't you?

[Hellektor]

Re: The Ottomans

I agree with you wholeheartedly. The creature you described above known as 'God' has nothing to do with God in the New Testament, even though Christians embrace the Old Testament as well but one can easily see a world of difference between the two.



Yes, he rejected all kinds of religious dogmas and 'institutionalized' religions but he (Voltaire) did believe in God.

Dear Lucin,

The Christian god has a dual character. As long as it is influenced by the Aryan/Iranian religions: Mithraism, Zoroaster and Mani and the Greek culture, it is a kind god, when it is the Jew god Yahweh, mostly through the writings of Paul who plays an essential role in the creation of Christianity, it is the vicious god of Torah, a bit less cruel nevertheless!

Do read Shojaeddin Shafa's books that are available online, if you haven't. Start with Tavallodi Digar that with a simple style explains all this, providing enough examples to shut up those who still have any respect for those vile Abrahamic religions. In Iran, we have had it up to our necks for the last thirty years and we are sick of it to death, aren't we Lucin?

[Lucin]

Re: The Ottomans

The puny, impotent, vengeful, racist, sexist, capricious, bloodthirsty, lying, treacherous, immoral, unjust, jealous, selfish, psychopathic god of the pornographic, hateful, gory, genocidal book Torah, where there's not a grain of morality but an unreasonable fear of this midget god, has been dead for a long, long time.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. The creature you described above known as 'God' has nothing to do with God in the New Testament, even though Christians embrace the Old Testament as well but one can easily see a world of difference between the two.

Read some Voltaire and countless other similar critics for already two or three centuries where they have found no less that 80,000 (yes, eighty thousand) fallacies in this book.

Yes, he rejected all kinds of religious dogmas and 'institutionalized' religions but he (Voltaire) did believe in God.

[Hellektor]

Re: The Ottomans

Please answer me,if a human isnt believing to God(Eloh:Jesus talked to God,Aramish word=Arabic word) how he/she died for his/her country,nation,freedom etc...?

I will not talking about to believe to God.Enough.

You are Christian,we are Muslim,Learn Masons,Templier Knights,Rose Croix(enemies of Christians).

The puny, impotent, vengeful, racist, sexist, capricious, bloodthirsty, lying, treacherous, immoral, unjust, jealous, selfish, psychopathic god of the pornographic, hateful, gory, genocidal book Torah, where there's not a grain of morality but an unreasonable fear of this midget god, has been dead for a long, long time. Read some Voltaire and countless other similar critics for already two or three centuries where they have found no less that 80,000 (yes, eighty thousand) fallacies in this book.

Belief in god is a totally personal matter and any prying into someone's personal beliefs amounts to inquisition. The god we picture now (whether we believe in a creator of the universe or not) is quadrillions of zillions of times vaster and more powerful than the plagiarized, local, belligerent psycho of the dark, Semitic religions.

[Hellektor]

Re: We are not empire seekers

Dear Hellektor,

I dont speak English very well,If I wish you could spoke Turkish,We discussed this subjects.

Thank you your answer,I understand you,but We need detail talking about this subject.Else result dont allow.

See you...

You don't seem to get it. I don't know it's because of your English or because of your limited world view; the point is, we are not discussing the Darwin theory here. I'm not talking about the evolution of ape to man in the last twenty million years when I mention evolution. I am talking about the evolution from Turk to man in the last ten to twelve thousand years, from the time the already evolved, for three or four hundred thousands of years to more or less the present state, Homo sapiens who also in the course of this time acquired certain traits like remorse, guilt, shame, compassion, honesty, modesty, sincerity, truthfulness, conscience, objectivity, self-criticism, sympathy, etc., which makes them what they are, i.e. civilized human beings.

I believe for some unknown reason the Turk creature has missed the train of this evolution, what accounts for its total lack of humanity. Instead of shame, remorse and guilt for what they did to Armenians, the Turk creature shamelessly projects their inhumanity onto Armenians, accusing them of their own savagery. Instead of these human traits, the Turk creature has an insane, megalomaniac pride and believes they are higher beings where in fact their contribution to human civilization has been nothing but death, destruction, rape, subjugation, terror, slavery, stealing of women and children, pillage, plunder and genocide for the last thousand years.