Turkish fata morgana

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), May 3, 2009 at 06:45

BERK akk wrote :

> Ianus,you are wery much influenced by a wrong propaganda.<

I know what you mean. I should be influenced by 'right' (=Turkish) propaganda and sing after you all the rubbish that you have been trying to sell here - starting with the gross garbage of Turkish denial of "Armenian genocide" and ending with praising the fragrant rubbish of an idyllic "Polish city" of 40 souls in Istanbul ... Yes , I am really influenced by the wrong propaganda ... of common sense, historical criticism, rationalism, sound disbelief, sobriety, realism ... How wrong of me !

> Most probably greek propaganda trying to find christ,jew ,armenian supporter for their helen dream.<

I found out a very long time ago that Turkish sources are practically useless if one tries to establish what the problem with the Turks is. If one doesn't know or infer it from other sources, one will never learn it from Turks. The most valuable things I learned come really not from Turks at all , but from Russians, Greeks, Armenians, Germans , even scantier French sources have told me more than the most melifluous Turkish sources.

One concrete example. Just look at yourself and all you have written here. It sounds so fine and sweet at first glance but do some rudimentary logical and factual analyses of it and all like by magic turns out to be just a Turkish fata morgana - beautiful images without contents and real substance.

> ATATURK in all his life was not jihadist furthermore his belief of islam religion is still under discussion.<

"Under discussion"? What sort of discussion is possible in a country where free speech is criminalized , I wonder ? If I know that I can be persecuted and jailed for a "wrong" word in a discussion about ex-jihadist Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, then imagine what sort of 'critical' discourse you'll am capable of persuing. Discussion on this subject is a farce , a parody under Turkish circumstances!

> Both secularist and islamist comuntiy has only one agreement that is Atatürk never was islamist and a jihadist.<

In his description of a voyage to Stalin's Russia Henri Membré after writing on the system of Soviet terror and personality cult Membre remarks on his sojourn in Turkey :

"Yet, I know that it's not advisable and wise to pronunce in a public conversation too loudly the name of 'Ghazi' either ..." (Pourtant je sais qu'ici il n'est pas prudent de prononcer trop haut dans une conversation publique le nom de Ghazi" ) [ Henri Membré, Un occidental en U.R.S.S. , Paris 1935, p.249]

If for reminding the tyrant or his hangmen of the past he wants to forget and efface , you can be arrested and disappear for ever in a Turkish jail or a distant ravine where before Armenians used to disappear, then after some years and decades you can bring about "one agreement that is [Ghazi ] never was islamist and a jihadist." I know the nature of public "agreements" in Turkey too well.

In other words you can fool Turks who are most despicable conformists to believe whatever their red sultan want them to believe in but you can't expect to fool the entire world to be like you. Not yet , at least...

"You are "not in favor of historical otoman empire holy war"? ... Remarkable mentality ! So now what you are not in favour of mustn't exist , needn't it ?"

> I am totaly in favor of T.C.Otoman empire simply ended.What is the wrong with my mentality.<

Things like the Ottoman empire don't simply end. Its overprivileged inhabitants, their ways, traditions, feelings, memories , longings live on - especially in such conservative and rigid societies like those ruled by Islam whose spearhead the Ottoman empire was. You can change people's clothes by decree but not people's souls and millenium-old identity. As someone put it : 'Kemalism is transient, Islam is permanent'.

" that most probably there is not a single ANZAC grave that hasn't been desecrated " .

> Cemeteries another discussion.Few yeasr ago i visisted .was realy good like a garden.<

If you read my comment, you would know I was speaking of the desecration that took place between 1916-1918. Remarkably enough, no Turkish graves were desecrated , not even whene the Greeks were stationed in the vicinity.

> But go anywhere in turkey ,they respect soldiers died in gelipoli.Common sense says they are our sons lost their lifes in our lands.Me also feel so .Please respect my observation and dont say lie.A small request.<

It's all articificial and is due to the fact that Turkey's new 'invincible' prophet Ghazi Kemal fought there. But tell me if you saw the monument to Liman von Sanders there, you know the "Turkish" commander in chief who promoted Mustafa Kemal to lead the 19th division ? It's funny how the Turks boast of this victory and forget to whome they owe it.

How about the Russian soldiers killed in Sarykamysh? Where are the monuments to honour them ?

> What did the Greeks do 40 km from Anakara" , you will ask ? No İ will not ask Ianus.You realy have good quality in your writings.This would bring a shadow to quality in the discussion:)<

You mean your angelic Turkishness may suffer as a result so that it's better to keep this precious and fragile gem away from Ianus' sacrilegious claws, what ?

"Moudros Turkey was obliged to meet a number of important political and military stipulations and make concessions"

> May be first we must discuss definition of land and property. Whole turkey lands were private property of ottoman dynesty including people on it...<

Yes, the Sultan was perhaps the greatest slave-owner of all times. Even the allegedly so happy Jews were no exception to his nasty oriental despotism. Later, however, internal decay and impotence of the central government and the capitulations imposed upon Turkey at the point of the sword - starting from Kuchukkajnarchi - greatly restricted and impeded this theoretical omnipotence. Dispossessing a Greek merchant who might happen to know somebody who knew a friend of the Russian consul, of his house might provoke a conflict with Russia which never ended without painful humiliations for the angelic Sublime Porte ...so where common sense and decency were unknown fear did the job.

> But they lost the war for countless reasons and made an agreement...They forget someting about their peoples thousands of years tradition."Looser commander cant make any agrrements."it was such an agreement..Looser are always trashed in to historys garbage dump.<

That's why victorious ex-Ghazi Ataturk is a revengeful saint now. Even from beyond his grave his wraith has people killed, beaten and jailed ... Might is right , what ? And might in the Orient tends to assume this absolute inhuman form.

"Greeks were acting as the armed hand of the Entente to see to it that the Turks complied with the stupulations of the agreements they had signed." See above.

> Signed contract was between a property owner and entente.Looser commander can not make an agreement.<

Between 1920-1922 it was far from sure who was going to be the loser and who the winner. The peace treaty was valid as signed by the valid government acknowledged internationally. Kemal was a rebel recognized only by Soviet Russia and unless Lenin had saved him, he would be today what the caliph is now in Turkey - the object vituperations, curses and ridicule or as you put it : "trashed into history's garbage dump".

>Atatürk was the new leader to make any agreement.<

Anachronisms again! There was no Atatürk at that time. There was Ghazi (=Destroyer of Christians) Mustafa Kemal Pasha surrounded by imams, beys and other pashas, purging Anatolia from the filth of polytheism and slaughtering Greeks and Armenians wherever he found them.

"I am waiting for its continuation in its secularist vs. Islamist form"

>I wonder which one do you want to win.<

Neither. They should mutually exterminate each other. Sorry for being too honest with you. I know Turks detest honesty and crave for eulogies instead...but still... why lie to the liars ?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".