-
-
Megalommatis is fast becoming one of my favorite comedians. He neatly summarizes and wraps up all that is Turco-centric/Turkish nationalist in the realm of sociology, history, political science, etc. Maybe he'll be their Foreign Minister someday...after he brings down France of course.Originally posted by steph View PostMarvellous piece !
I doubt the turks could top that one.
General Antranik (1865-1927): “I am not a nationalist. I recognize only one nation, the nation of the oppressed.”Comment
-
-
The guy is a first rate.....IDIOT!!!"All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)Comment
-
More from our good friend Megalomaniac
Turkey and France – the future of a centuries old conflict
Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis
Orientalist, Historian, Political Scientist, Dr. Megalommatis, 51, is the author of 12 books, dozens of scholarly articles, hundreds of encyclopedia entries, and thousands of articles. He speaks, reads and writes more than 15, modern and ancient, languages. He refuted Greek nationalism, supported Martin Bernal’s Black Athena, and rejected the Greco-Romano-centric version of History. He pleaded for the European History by J. B. Duroselle, and defended the rights of the Turkish, Pomak, Macedonian, Vlachian, Arvanitic, Latin Catholic, and Jewish minorities of Greece. Born Christian Orthodox, he adhered to Islam when 36, devoted to ideas of Muhyieldin Ibn al Arabi.
Greek citizen of Turkish origin, Prof. Megalommatis studied and/or worked in Turkey, Greece, France, England, Belgium, Germany, Syria, Israel, Iraq, Iran, Egypt and Russia, and carried out research trips throughout the Middle East, Northeastern Africa and Central Asia. His career extended from Research & Education, Journalism, Publications, Photography, and Translation to Website Development, Human Rights Advocacy, Marketing, Sales & Brokerage. He traveled in more than 80 countries in 5 continents. He defends the Right of Aramaeans, Oromos, Ogadenis, Sidamas, Berbers, Afars, Anuak, Darfuris, Bejas and Tibetans to National Independence, demands international recognition for Kosovo, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, and Transnistria, calls for National Unity in Somalia, and denounces Islamic Terrorism.
author's email
author's web site
view author's other articles
Join this author's mailing list
Your Name:
E-mail Address:
Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis
January 3, 2008
In an earlier article under the title 'Turkey vs. France: a Clash – Part of the Freemasonic Plan for Europe', we interpreted the present, gravely Anti-Turkish, stance of France as part of a long plan, initially addressed against the Ottoman Empire, and currently implemented in order to produce – through sophisticated machinations – a clash between European Union and a Russian – Turkish alliance. We stressed the point that the only way for Turkey to possibly outmaneuver this ominous plan is to deal with the Anglo-French Freemasonic establishments in the same way they deal with Turkey.
As we viewed all the expressions of Anti-Turkish policy – from opposition to Turkey's presence in Northern Iraq to the fallacious 'Armenian Genocide' story promotion and from fueling terrorism and secessionism among the so-called Kurds to partial attitudes toward Kosova and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus – as emanations of the same vicious plan, we recommended a severe retaliation against France and England. In the present article, we will focus extensively on the subject.
Lessons to take from the Ottoman Empire Collapse
As the Anti-Turkish plans of the Apostate Freemasonic Lodge that controls the Anglo-French political establishments are a simple continuation of the demolition project of the Ottoman Empire, a careful study of what happened and what did not happen then becomes urgent.
As a matter of fact, the Ottoman Empire never counter-attacked the Western European colonial powers that presented viciously alternating faces, now anti-Ottoman (when entering in war in order to either invade and detach Ottoman provinces or fuel supposedly local anti-Ottoman rebellions) and after a while seemingly pro-Ottoman (when they supported the Sultan against Russia).
As the Ottoman Empire was, as political entity, completely different from Turkey, involving different ideological backgrounds, we will not analyze here the reasons of the quasi-inexistent Western European policy of the Sultan; they mostly pertain to the ignorance, darkness, and barbarism that had prevailed within Islam, the situation that we currently attest in backward, failed countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Algeria, etc. This situation took an end in Turkey with the rise of Kemal Ataturk to power, and thanks to his groundbreaking innovations that the illiterate and ignorant tyrants of the so-called 'Arabic-speaking countries' are unable to implement today, 70 years after Kemal Ataturk's death.
The Ottoman authorities never imagined that Knowledge is of primordial importance in the clash between two inimical countries and establishments.
The Ottoman authorities never understood that the only way for them to be in a position to hit back was to know about their adversaries as much as they had known about the Ottoman Caliphate.
The Ottoman authorities never realized that France and England were also weak countries with their problems; and they never discovered the very simple reality that if Ottoman specialists studied thoroughly these problems, they would be able to figure out effective ways of successfully using them against the Anglo-French establishments.
If the Ottoman authorities had sent, at a certain moment during the early 19th century, 100 students to France to study the local languages, society, culture, politics, history, antiquities, and religions, and to contact the various indigenous nations that had been monstrously oppressed, tyrannized, depersonified, and dehumanized for the needs of the French Freemasonic establishment, after some time the Ottoman administration would have got enough information to shape a correct decision.
This would imply Ottoman involvment in Ireland and Scotland against England, and in Corsica, Brittany, Occitania, Catalonia, Bask country against France. By keeping an adversary busy at home, you get relief from that opponent's pressure on you on your own soil. If Ottoman infiltration in Brittany and Corsica was strong enough, the explosive situation at home would let the French understand that fueling rebellion and secessionist movements in the Ottoman Empire would be extremely costly. Either France would reconsider its anti-Ottoman policies or the French engagement in areas of the Ottoman Empire would be weaker due to the urgent need for resources an explosion in the terribly oppressed provinces of Brittany or Corsica would signify.
How Turkey's French policy should be.
At this point, we will present the basic axes of a consistent French policy of Turkey, geared to create grave problems to Paris, and convince the perfidious French Freemasonic establishment that it will be impossible to maintain in the future the current Anti-Turkish stance and conspiracy.
Academic, financial, political and military authorities in Turkey must understand that France and England are not powerful countries that nobody can possibly target and damage. Of course, in terms of GDP, trade, governmental budget, and nuclear weaponry, France and England look more powerful than Turkey, but one should not judge exclusively based on figures, and ignore ground realities.
In fact, France and England, are nowadays at their recent history's lowest point. Both countries exercise their influence by means of proxies promoted either in other European countries or in their former colonies. That's why they perfectly market their universities in order to have ignorant and unsuspicious foreign students enrolled there and thus transformed into French and English proxies either they realize it or not. They mostly rely on the efficiency of the colonial system the structures of which remained intact until now because no other countries duly identified, perceived and analyzed the reasons of its functionality. Both countries benefitted enormously from the fake European Union project because through this vicious plan French and English companies bought up the economies of small countries, thus rendering them mere political satellites.
But France and England are weak, and France is weaker than England, thanks to the disastrous Mitterrand and the calamitous Chirac presidency. Due to globalization, their economies lost pace, whereas China's and India's cheap products invade one market after the other, thus contributing to France's and England's de-industrialization. Social clashes are grave, and not correctly reported in the world's mass media.
Their European, African and Asiatic minorities, formed following an incredible influx of immigrants aspiring to become Gastarbeiter, contributed to mayhem of all aspects, social, cultural, religious, educational and political. Lower social strata of indigenous peoples have merged with these minorities, joining them in an overwhelming rejection of the ruling upper middle classes. The striking economic differences that currently exist between the two parts of the local societies (the upper and the lower) consist in an excellent opportunity for Turkey (and any other) to exploit through proper subsidizing and guidance. The so-called societies of two thirds are extremely weak structures.
Turkey needs at least 100 specialists specialized in modern France (involving various local languages, History, Religion, Politics and Sociology) within the next few years; of course, proper guidance should be given to them beforehand. They must have a general idea of the terrible clashes between the Gaelic (Gaulois) and the Frankish elements that characterized the medieval and modern history of the treacherous country that shamefully portrays itself as the cradle of the modern European Democracy.
All the conflicting elements must be highlighted, the correct connections made, and proper support given to Corsicans, Bretons, Basks, Catalans and Occitans who must be incited to rebelion, attacks of all sorts against the criminal, French Freemasonic establishment, and secession. What France created in the Iraqi Kurdistan against Turkey, Turkey must produce, pertinently retaliating, in Brittany, Corsica, and elsewhere on French territory.
National movements and social clashes must plunge France into an unprecedented turmoil and totally exhaust the national resources of that malignant, and viciously Anti-Turkish country.
Empty the Louvre!
Turkey must cause a lethal blow to France's image of Embodiment of Culture, Epitome of Education, and Epicenter of the Lights. Instead of foreign governments asking the return of archeological treasures stolen by the criminal French archeologists, local organizations set up by correctly guided immigrants, destitute French of the lower classes, and (culturally and nationally awaken) Britons, Occitans, Catalans, Corsicans, Alsatians and Basks of France must demand the morally imposed action.
An organization named "Do not visit the Louvre Genocide" must daily mobilize protestations and manifestations outside the former royal palace of France to prevent tourists from visiting the stolen collections that the French have disreputably gathered there over the past two centuries.
Another organization named "Money to France's victims, not thieves" should collect money from tourists ready to visit night clubs, casinos and cabarets, and fund NGOs engaged in former French colonies.
Independence for Catalonia, Bask Country, Corsica, and Polynesia
Even more aggressive against France the Turkish foreign policy should be in cases of the still existing French colonies; French Polynesia should become an immediate Turkish concern, and Turkey with its allies in Oceania, Australia and New Zealand, should fuel strife and clash, insurgence, and a successful outcome of the indigenous people's liberation movement.
A global effort of methodic and systematic defamation of France must be undertaken - not to diffuse lies (as the typical French policies would in similar cases) but to reveal the truth to billions of people allover the world about crimes perpetrated by the France in Africa and the Middle East, in Asia (particularly with respect to the Eastern Christians, the Aramaeans, and the Armenians, whom French gangsters masqueraded as missionaries either multi-divided or turned them their own countries, namely the Ottoman Empire and Iran, with the well-known disastrous consequences) and in Oceania. French colonial crimes in America should not be forgotten either.
It is impossible for Turkey to get successfully engaged against France without 100 Ph.D. published, publicized, commented and quoted in more than 10 languages allover the world.
Remove French Cultural Centers from allover the world!
Another effort should be deployed in the former French colonies; through the formation of bilateral NGOs (Turkish / Algerian, Turkish / Syrian), all French colonial deeds carried out and policies implemented against the normal formation of National Identity (of the various colonized peoples) and the elaboration of a true, locally centered, historiography should be denounced.
Accordingly, these NGOs, as social groups of pressure, should demand that all French institutes and colleges, universities and cultural centers in Damascus or Sanaa, Cairo or Rabat be closed down, as diffusing racist versions and visions of History.
As a matter of fact, Turkey needs a theoretical background to fight at an academic - cultural - political level against France, denounce the French colonial crimes (either in Morocco or in Corsica), and mobilize local masses allover the world against France (either in oppressed, Gaelic, Brittany or in semi-liberated Tunisia).
What the theoretical background of the Turkish attack against France should be we will analyze in a forthcoming article.General Antranik (1865-1927): “I am not a nationalist. I recognize only one nation, the nation of the oppressed.”Comment
-
Another nut job conspiracy theorist.Comment
-
Turkey and Bashir
Bashir in Turkey -- The unanswered questions
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Morton ABRAMOWITZ
One would think Turkey's leaders would be a little more careful before laying down the red carpet for the likes of President Omar al Bashir of Sudan.
Bashir is widely viewed in most parts of the world as an illegitimate dictator presiding over a pariah state guilty of crimes against humanity. He is a seemingly strange bedfellow for Turkey's AKP (Justice and Development Party) trying to prove to many domestic and Western observers of its balanced, well-calibrated foreign policy, and its attachment to international norms.
Turkey has been trying to persuade the world, not very successfully, that there was no Armenian genocide in 1915. The picture of President Abdullah Gül smiling at a joint press conference is hardly going to convince skeptics that Turkey even knows what genocide means, and it will certainly raise doubts in supporters of Turkey. After all, Bashir's Sudan has been accused of a relentless campaign of ethnic cleansing that has left over 200,000 Sudanese dead and more than 2 million driven from their homes. This has prompted some (including the United States government) to suggest rightly or wrongly, it amounts to genocide. To many around the world, Bashir whitewashes his massive crimes against humanity and Gül and Erdoğan avert their gaze..
Bashir's visit is hardly surprising - it is yet another step in a developing relationship. It follows the visit of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to Sudan in March 2006 for an Arab League summit. With a side-trip to Darfur and relatively benign comments about the situation, Erdoğan was perceived as issuing a statement of support for the Sudanese government. Just two weeks ago, Turkish Defense Minister Vecdi Gönüi was in Khartoum to discuss military cooperation between the two countries, and what some suspect to be negotiations over Turkish arms sales to Khartoum. The AKP's leader's actions are in stark contrast to the Foreign Ministry's advice and former President Sezer's refusal to accept Bashir's invitation to visit.
Put in these stark terms it is hard to find logic behind the government's actions, but this may be not giving the Turkish leadership enough credit. There are some counter-explanations worth considering.
An alternative foreign policy?
Perhaps, the AKP government is carving out an alternative foreign policy role for itself – that of a genuine intermediary, even mediator, in some of the world's most intractable conflicts involving Arab and Moslem factions and identity issues. It is certainly true that one needs to be in communication with all the parties to dispute to convey to them what needs to be done to resolve it. By perceiving to cozy up to Bashir, Turkey is also buying much-needed credibility in his eyes, and may position itself to become an important interlocutor for peace in Darfur. However, there is little to support this explanation. To date, talks between Ankara and Khartoum have been dominated by negotiations over trade, investment, energy and military issues, all areas that Turkey's would-be partners in the EU are increasingly avoiding.
Alternatively perhaps Ankara believes that support for Bashir is the key to peace in Darfur, and that discordant rebel movements must be brought under control. After all after four years western policy is virtually bankrupt. Its one major achievement is helping keep 2 million displaced people alive, not in getting them home or bringing peace to the region. Ankara could be signaling a willingness to go down a different path to resolving the Darfur conflict – real politik overcoming morality – and seeking success where the West has failed, by bolstering Bashir and his forces to go after the rebels. That would be a unique policy. In addition, it is conceivable that the Turkish government believes all Darfur needs is a little more humanitarian assistance which Erdoğan promised – a gesture described as indicative of the Turkish government's profound humanitarian concern for the people of Darfur. Turkish aid to Darfur's people so far has been minor.
In some countries and perhaps in Turkey many believe the AKP government is intent on promoting Islamic unity and perceive the Sudan as a Muslim country being unfairly treated by the West, whatever the scale of horrors being perpetrated.
One thing is certain: The Turkish government has taken a serious diplomatic move, opening it up correctly for censure unless it can better explain its intentions and policies. Failing to do so and provide relevant details of the meetings with Sudanese leaders, it will be condemned as a diplomacy that supports a disgraceful dictatorship without benefiting the innocent victims of Darfur in any meaningful manner.
No amount of expressions of sympathy for the victims of Darfur will save Gül and Erdoğan from the pointed questions clouding Bashir's visit.
* Morton Abramowitz is senior fellow at the Century Foundation and former U.S. ambassador to TurkeGeneral Antranik (1865-1927): “I am not a nationalist. I recognize only one nation, the nation of the oppressed.”Comment
-
Do Erdogan andd Gul have rocks for brains? I actually thought they were smarter than this! Sometimes I think Turkey is it own worst enemy when it comes to public relations.
Sudan's Bashir defends Darfur militia chief
By Evren Mesci
Reuters
Monday, January 21, 2008
ANKARA: Sudan's president on Monday rebuffed criticism of Musa Hilal, accused by Washington of coordinating Darfur's marauding militias, following Hilal's promotion to a key government post in Khartoum.
Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, on the first day of a visit to EU candidate country Turkey, also accused Europe of backing the violence in Darfur.
The United States, the European Union and rights groups are unhappy with Bashir's visit, although Turkey insists it will press home the West's message that Sudan needs to work towards resolving the Darfur crisis.
"Mr. Hilal himself is a Sudanese citizen. He has a very influential personality in Darfur. He has contributed greatly to stability and security in the region," Bashir told a joint news conference with Turkish President Abdullah Gul.
"In Sudan we don't think the claims against Hilal are true. We absolutely do not believe them. The people who really commit murders in Darfur are receiving help from Europe and others."
Bashir's government has been criticised after a five-year conflict in Sudan's west sparked what U.N. officials called the world's worst humanitarian crisis with an estimate 200,000 dead and 2.5 million driven from their homes.
Mostly non-Arab rebels took up arms in early 2003 accusing Sudan's central government of neglect. Khartoum mobilised mostly Arab tribes to quell the revolt.
Sudan's Minister of Federal Affairs Abdel Basit Sabderat confirmed at the weekend that Hilal had been picked as his new adviser. The presidency had previously denied the appointment.
Washington says Hilal is the coordinator of the Janjaweed militias accused of war crimes in Darfur. He denies atrocities and says he mobilised his tribesmen to defend their lands after a government call to "popular defence".
Turkey's Gul, who looked uncomfortable during the news conference, said he had urged Bashir during their talks to seek a peaceful end to the conflict in Darfur.
Bashir's visit to Ankara and to Istanbul, Turkey's business hub, is expected to boost economic ties, though human rights groups have criticised Turkey for hosting Sudan's leader.
Despite the conflict in western Darfur, foreign investment has rocketed in Sudan's capital Khartoum. Turkish companies have won large government construction contracts to build bridges and Sudan's first mall.
(Writing by Gareth Jones, editing by Jon Boyle)General Antranik (1865-1927): “I am not a nationalist. I recognize only one nation, the nation of the oppressed.”Comment
-
ERDOĞAN SAYS ISRAEL~RS GAZA BLOCKADE UNACCEPTABLE
Today's Zaman
Jan 23 2008
Turkey
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan yesterday condemned Israel for
a blockade it has imposed on the Gaza Strip, saying the Palestinians
there are faced with a "humanitarian tragedy."
Israel blockaded Gaza on Thursday after rocket attacks by Palestinian
militants, halting fuel shipments. Three days later, Gaza's only
power plant, which provides electricity to about one-third of Gaza's
1.5 million residents, shut down. Under heavy international pressure,
Israel allowed fuel for the plant back into Gaza on Tuesday.
"Palestine is already an open air prison. People living in Gaza are
faced with severe difficulties in the supply of water, electricity,
medicine and food. These people face a humanitarian tragedy,"
Erdoğan told members of his ruling Justice and Development Party
(AK Party) at a weekly meeting in Parliament. "We have difficulties
in understanding this [blockade]."
He also criticized Israeli officials for remarks linking the blockade
to rocket attacks, saying they fail to explain how many Israelis died
in these attacks. "It is not possible to accept such acts that punish
2 million people. It is not understandable to collectively punish a
community because some of them are doing wrong things."
This was the second time Erdoğan criticized Israel for its actions
against the Palestinians. Earlier this month, he said the United
States, not Israel, should man a barrier between Israel and Palestinian
territories and complained that even his car had been forced to wait
for half an hour while trying to cross to the Palestinian side after
talks in Israel during an official visit in the past.
Israel largely closed Gaza's crossings to all but humanitarian goods
in June after Hamas seized control of the territory.
Warning to Obama
Erdoğan also responded to US presidential candidate Barack Obama after
he pledged he would support Armenian claims of genocide at the hands
of the late Ottoman Empire if he wins the race. He reiterated that
Turkish-US ties would receive a serious blow if the Congress passes
a resolution recognizing Armenian claims of genocide.
"Everybody knows that passage of such a resolution would lead
to irremediable wounds in Turkey-US relations," Erdoğan said in
Parliament. According to the prime minister, such remarks stem
from lack of sufficient information on the part of the presidential
candidates about US foreign policy in general.
"These unfortunate remarks by a presidential candidate risk casting
a shadow on our relations," Erdoğan said. "Our relations should not
be sacrificed due to slander campaigns by certain lobbies."
Obama pledged to support passage of the resolution, shelved twice in
the US Congress under pressure from the administration, which feared
it risked spoiling ties with NATO ally Turkey, in a letter sent to a
leading American-Armenian group, the Armenian National Committee of
America (ANCA).
Obama wrote in the Jan. 19 letter that he had a "firmly held conviction
that the Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion,
or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by
an overwhelming body of historical evidence."
"The facts are undeniable. An official policy that calls on diplomats
to distort historical facts is an untenable policy. As a senator,
I strongly support passage of the Armenian Genocide Resolution, and
as president I will recognize the Armenian genocide," Obama said in
the letter.
Last year, despite pleas from the George W. Bush administration,
the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the US House of Representatives
passed a nonbinding resolution that described the events of 1915 as
genocide. Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House and an ardent supporter of
the Armenian claims, has so far not brought the resolution to the House
floor after a strong appeal from the Bush administration that passage
of the resolution would deeply harm relations with NATO ally Turkey.
------------------------------------------------
I'm sure I'm not alone in wanting to puke from the irony!Comment
-
It's not that they are complete idiots, it's only their every action has to be filled with historianics and drama, out of the desparation for friends policy.We used to play a game when kids called corner grabbing, it kind of reminds me a lot of the Turkish foreign policy.Originally posted by Joseph View Post"All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)Comment
Tweet
Comment