"Relief in converting temples into mosques " ...

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Jul 26, 2010 at 12:46

Hikmet Pala writes :

> It seems to me that Ianus is so much immersed in his [and I presume it is a he] that he cannot read what is being unsaid or to be more precise, what is being said!<

Indeed, a ghiaour like me needs a specially trained tafsir scholar to understand both the said and unsaid ayats from your previous post , namely :

> when you talk about Turkish invasion of Northern Cyprus, you omit Greek terror on Greek socialists, trade unionists, and slaughter of Turkish population in enclaves. Not once but several times...

Your "peaceable Greeks" imported from mainland Greece, killed so many undefended, truly impoverished and defenceless Turks in their enclaves, waves upon waves..." And then goes on to accuse the Jews of crimes against Allah's chosen people . <

How could I draw my conclusions reading the above in the sense which now turns out to be – according to their author- the contrary of what they mean ?

For now you disclose your Moslem identity and alleged Slavic descent despite your Turkish name. But none-the-less you are aware of Turkish crimes which for some unspecified reason you have omitted in your answer to Dr. Pipes' commendable article.

You say :

< it goes without saying that I most strongly protest 1934 Trachian Incidents where tens of thousands of Jews were mass-assaulted, raped, some killed, by Turkish Fascist thugs, herded from their homes and within hours fled for their lives. Leaving everything they owned to be plundered <

Well , you should elaborate on this topic of Ataturk's pogroms of the Jews in 1934 to give Dr. Pipes a chance to revise his hagiographic views on Ataturk. Maybe we won't be so sure of what he has written on the subject , e.g. that "Turkish policy toward Israel, historically warm and only a decade ago approaching full alliance has cooled since Islamists took power in Ankara in 2002." and consequently it is only the bad Islamists getting power 8 years ago that have spoiled the Turkish-Israeli idyll , although bad Islamists haven't evicted thousands of Jews of their homes as brave Ataturk did in 1934 following Hitler's contemporary practices.

Anyway , speaking of crimes and evil , it is reassuring you say you have protested against the Turkish crimes. But as a Moslem will you also protest against all the evil and all the crimes committed by your so called "prophet"? Will you protest against public beheadings of Jews in Medina organized by him after a mock trial of the Jews , against selling women and children by him on a local slave market , against killing a breast feeding mother (Asma bint Marwan) , against Muhammed's paedophilia, robberies of caravans etc. etc. ? I don't insist on your protesting against such peanuts as Mohammed's hate speech the 'Quran' and hadiths are so rich in as well as against his notorious perfidy, threats , curses and lies.

You say you're a translator for the European Court of Human Rights , and as such you must meet very high moral standards yourself , just like all of you , you Human Rights Activists and collaborators. If so , I find your answer to the above question a crucial one to assess the credibility of all the rest of what you stand for .

You write further :

> But it seems that any of these – even after having been stressed, explained...- would mean much to Ianus. <

Indeed , what can it mean to me if you omit from your previous and present post the conspicuous Turkish crimes on Cyprus and see only "Greek terror" and that " "peaceable Greeks" imported from mainland Greece, killed so many undefended, truly impoverished and defenceless Turks in their enclaves, waves upon waves..." ?

Even in this reply you haven't included the slightest hint that may cast a shadow on the Turkish "innocence" in Cyprus? To omit all the x tons of bombs dropped in 1974 , how about mentioning the Turks dropping c. 340 kg of bombs and napalm on Cyprus in August 1964 ? By the way, how many kilos of bombs and barrels of napalm did "the Greek terrorists" and "Greeks imported from mainland , (who) killed many undefended, truly impoverished and defenceless Turks in their enclaves, waves upon waves" drop during all the conflict according to your sources ?

You continue :

> Perhaps he doesn't understand my obvious remark: " At least Turkey is in spending genuine effort to end her own hypocrisies <

and explain

> for the first time in the history of the Republic, we have a government, which is at odds with the regime' ancient, so the government no longer swallow the threats, lies and distortions of the military, judiciary, the fallacies of the nation-state, and is in the process of breaking off with th establishment, which was the ones that committed all the atrocities that Ianus fanatically distorts.<

Frankly, I don't know what I am 'fanatically distorting' by pointing to manifest continued lies and perfidious Turkish actions added by the present regime to the old unrepented lies and crimes ? What sort of a change is it , anyway , underway which makes you so optimistic about Turkey ? Islam's official triumph in Ataturkistan after it unofficially captured total power with the expulsion and extermination of all things and persons un-Islamic , i.e. with the advent of Kemalism many decades ago ?

I don't believe in the distinction you implicitly make between Kemalist or anti-Kemalist Turkey. Turkey with the cult of Ataturk or without this mad cult will remain what she has always been – a dysfunctional, brutal police state with no freedom of thought , with all the oppressive laws in force , with denial of her repeated genocides , with its aggressiveness and perfidy now intesified by overpopulation and scarcity of Turkey's resources.

The distinction you introduce is formal and and misleading. It is intended fool again the gullible public outside Turkey just in the same spirit Kemalism was a big lie to fool first Soviet Russia and then the west to allow the Turks to implement their policy of genocides and then get the resources and technology Turkey needed so despertaely to conduct her aggressive and perfidious policy.

Kemal himself was a ghazi , a jihadist par excellencee , who created a purely Moslem Turkey and only because the caliph had issued a death fatwa against him he broke his ties with Islam in oder to save his head. He tried hard to obliterate his jihadist past and his real role for Islam's triumph in Turkey. Yet like no one else in the whole history of Turkey this pseudo-secularist has contributed to make her a barren Moslem monoculture of which neither Mehmet II nor Abdul Hamid could have ever dreamt.

Generally speaking , I don't believe Turks and Moslems at all and I can tell you that so far I have met only one Turk who has evoked my trust and respect. He boldly admitted the facts and didn't try to fool me about Islam and obfuscate its lies and monstrosities. Quite the contrary! But he did so because he is a communist. He has told me that to his mind Turkey is today what Iran was before the return of Ayatollah Ruholla Homeini in 1978. There is an Islamic revolutiuon in the making in Turkey which he so much abhors and which you're trying to glorify here representing it as a merciful and beneficent event for all mankind !

You seem to be criticizing this and that in Turkey as long as it is done by the so called 'secularists'. Yet the moment the conflict touches Islam vs. kaffirism as in Northern Cyprus you switch to the Moslem story of "Greek terror" and ""peaceable Greeks" imported from mainland Greece, kill(ing) so many undefended, truly impoverished and defenceless Turks in their enclaves, waves upon waves...". What a duplicity !

You write then :

> some Turks do not notice great atrocities, do not protest strongly injustices, do not acknowledge the cruelties committed against Greek, Jews, Kurds, Armenians, in fact everybody in Turkey, of any conviction, or creed or ethnicity. Further, he doesn't seem to think nothing is being done about it. Well he should raise his head from the pile he is in and look again. <

"Some Turks"? I have met many many Turks and only a single one faced and admitted the dismal reality ! A Turkish communist ! The rest lied to me about that and when pressed hard with evidence and exposed either disappeared , changed the subject and/or threatened to kill me - to prove how peaceful Turks are , I presume ! Just read what Turks write here. Vehbi cam e.g. "napalm was not used. forced etnic cleaning and colonisation is a total lie." But no! I challenge you to find a single comment coming from Turkey on articles by Dr. Pipes where a Turk does admit the Armenian genocide and crimes committed by his brethren in Allah . I also challenge you to find a single Turk who condemns jailing those who expose those crimes . I haven't seen any Turk "secularist" or "Islamist"–except this lonely Turkish communist - who says so and I'll be grateful if you showed me another one !

Then you remark :

> Going back to Ianus and some of the fallacies: Churches, temples.... It sounds as if only Turks did such damages. What does he think Vandals, Vikings , Bretons, Romans, Byzantines did? Or Mongols, Spaniards, Jesuits, Catholics...<

What fallacy do you find in my referrence to the widely available data ? And what purpose is this relativism of barbarity intended to serve ? To make Islam look innocent and respectable despite the heinous crimes that have been and are being committed and never admitted by it ? Just to remind you of one difference , while the Vandals, the Vikings , the Mongols etc. stopped their sacrilegious barbarity centuries ago , Islam's aggression against non-Islamic cults and places sof worship continues and Northern Cyprus is an excellent proof for that murderous trend Islam embodies. So your apologetic rhetoric in favour of Islam is totally misplaced and absurd here. It betrays you as a dangerous Moslem mole !

>I am not going to justify what Turks did, or did not.<

If you aren't going to do that , then why did you make evil so relative and flexible a while ago ? When the Turks beat , loot and rape Jews in Thrace , you protest . When they change churches into mosques you speak of "relief" ! When they level churches to the ground or change them into stables and latrines , you have a ready excuse that the Vikings and Vandals did the same after all ... some 16 - 10 centuries ago , so why bother ?

Now, Pomac , your ancestors were all Christians who were forced into Islam with sword , tortue, threats and blackmail. You don't care much about forced conversion , do you ? Their churches were also first desecrated and then changed into mosques which you attend at present with so much reverence. With your janissary mentality it doesn't bother you much either, does it ? Your soul have been kidnapped and corrupted beyond repair by the Turks and their evil Islam .

>But there is some relief in converting temples into mosques; <

It's the most diabolical and cynical statement that I have ever read on the subject ! I assure you it is the most diabolical and barbarian "relief" I can imagine ! Allah humiliates Christ . Moslems piss on altars, tear down icons , defacate on the mosaics , scrape off the faces in the frescoes, spit into the holy vessels, break the statues of the saints , deride the pagan effigies , shout "Allahu ekber" where once psalms for the glory of God's Mother were being sung ... It is what happens when a church is desecrated and if you haven't seen it there are videos available on YouTube on what Moslem do in chruches in Kosovo !

And yet here a Moslem comes and announces the incredible message to the world "But there is some relief in converting temples into mosques" ! You are not you ashamed of believing that Satanic evil death cult called Islam , are you ?

How about transforming your local mosque back into a church and you into a Christian ? That would be a fine spectacle. We could also call it "relief" too , couldn't we? It would provoke a world-wide jihad with Moslem bombs and suicide attacks on a daily basis. But Islam is a religion of "peace" , isn't it , Moslem ? Nothing to fear then . ;)

You add :

"that allows them to stand, and perhaps turn them into museums."

What a clever and suave liar you are ! Converting a church into a mosques serves not that purpsoe at all but quite a different one which you perfidously or ignorantly omit here ! It serves to show the kafirs' god's impotence, humiliation, defeat . It is a sadistic triumph of Allah and his followers over the infidels and their religion . It's a highly symbolic brutal and violent act .

It was how your ancestors Christian Pomacs were made to abadon their raped faith and to convert to the new Satanic power that came with the Turkish nomads in the middle of the 14^th century to Thrace ! There is a nice source that tells what sort of "relief" converting churches into mosques brought with it. From a letter of Emperor Alexios Comnenus to Robert Count of Flanders (around 1090) .

" the Turks ... daily ravage .. and unitermittently seize [...territory]; and there is promiscuous slaughter and indescribable killing and derision of the Christians.

For they circumcise the boys and youths of the Christians over the Christian baptismal fonts, and in contempt of Christ they pour the blood from the circumcision into the said baptismal fonts and compel them to void urine thereon; and thereafter they violently drag them around in the church, compelling them to blaspheme the name of the Holy Trinity and the belief therein. But those who refuse to do these things they punish in diverse ways and ultimately they kill them. Noble matrons and their daughters whom they have robbed [of their possessions] they, one after another like animals, defile in adultery. Some, indeed, in their corrupting shamelessly place virgins before the faces of their mothers and compell them to sing wicked and obscene songs, until they have finished their own wicked acts."

The crying boy forcibly circumcised and bleeding over the baptismal font and then kicked and dragged around the church or the girl gang-raped in the church by the Moslem beasts may have been your Pomac greatgreatgreatgreatgreatgrandparents whom you , their descedant , have renounced and despised not less than their sadistic Turkish tormentors .

You also write :

"We also know that the emergence of Turkish nationalism unfortunately coincided with the era of fading nationalism and the notion of the nation-state. Perhaps it was for this reason that it was even fiercer, more single minded and cruder. Perhaps in that case someone can explain to me why Greeks do not recognize us Pomaks as a Slavonic speaking Moslem population but; Traks [Ethnic Thracians] of an obscure origin-and of course more Greek than Greeks. It somehow sounds very familiar to"

Some things may seem to you simpler when you translate them into a Moslem Pomac's perspective but definitely the Young Turks' or Kemal's genocides are hardly explained by that perspective. And you Pomacs nowadays you are just a Moslem Turkish Fifth Column in Greece . You receive instructions, training, school books, subsidies from Turkey. You're more Turkish than Greek and you don't bother much about what the Greeks think an expect of you as long as you can enjoy the privileges of being a protected minority in Greece and serve at the same time as a dangerous tool of Turkey to be used against Greece. All your mosques are inflitrated by Turkish-trained preacehrs. Your education and value system , even Pomac alphabet, come from Turkey . It is where you are leaning and I presume the day the Turks attack Greece you'll backstab the Greeks doing what the Turkish Cypriots had been doing during the 1974 invasion of Cyprus – hunting down the Greeks and disclosing their hiding-places to the Moslem "liberators" from beyond the Evros. The Turks are cajoling and training you to play the same role the Cypriot Turks did play in the drama of 1974 !

You remark :

"Both the population exchanges of 1923 and Cyprus 1974 were unfortunate180 000 regrettable but we live in a real world."

We do live in a real world but it doesn't necessarily mean that all of us are realists. Between 1919-1923 the jihadist Turks exterminated 1 000 000 Greeks . Won't you say "regrettable but and regrettable but we live in a real world " ? When Islam wins there is nothing to complain about , what ? The Turks were ready to exterminate the remainging 1,5 mln refugees but agreed to save them in exchange for political and economic advantages – the straits , the borders , the old loans ... And how many Turks did the Greeks kill according to your Turkish sources ?

You remark casually :

" Stalin's forced march of Crimean Tatars... the history is full of it. "

As to the poor Moslem Tatars they were traitors who had actively collaborated with the Nazis, volunteered for Moslem SS legions , hunted down partisans , while the Russians were fighting their death and life struggle for survival against the Nazis. When you lose more than 20 000 000 of your best men , women and children you can only wonder why Stalin didn't simply wipe out all of these Tatar Nazis but sent them to live in the steppes of Kazakhstan instead, which incidentally was their ancient homeland ?

You point out :

"Another outrageous suggestion is that Turks did what they did in Cyprus was because US wanted them to do so, because Makarios saw the light and turned Bolshevik! Well, almost. There is a proverb in Turkish: If my auntie had balls, she would have been my uncle!"

There is an interesting declassified NATO document from July 1974 [ 5G/SD/WASHDC-12/S26-D48/JULE74 ] , reproduced here . It is a message from the then Secretary General of NATO Joseph Luns to US Secretary of Defense J.R. Schlesinger . It reads :

" The Assistant Undersecretary of state Sisco's visit to the Alliance, showed the decision of the American goverment to finish the Cyprus problem.
We agreed with Mr Sisco for supporting the Turkish army during the landing, as well as, in the violent expulsion of Makarios " .

Do the Turkifed Pomacs have any Turkish proverb that can explain EXPLICIT US decisions to help the Turks invade and occupy 37% of a neutral country and to forcibly expel its elected president - not to mention its indigenous population - in any other terms than those contained in Ianus' "outrageous suggestion ... that Turks did what they did in Cyprus was because US wanted them to do so"?

As their failed attempt to invade Cyprus in 1964 showed without the approval and encouragement from Washington the Turks could not do as much as place a single Turkish soldier on Cyprus, let alone equip, prepare and send a 40 000 strong army occupy more than a third part of a neutral non-aligned country which Cyprus was.

In this context an interesting question for an employee of the European Court of Human Rights like you would be : Why could the Turks go ahead with Attuiila 1/2 operations and during two month terrorize Greeks on Cyprus while the Greeks couldn't do as much as send a single submarine or a single plane to help push back the Turkish aggression and save 180 000 people from expulsion and Turkish air and ground terror ?

You conclude :

"I think Ianus should take his accusation of "Turkish Ministry of Truth which has instructed you" and shove it... into his pocket where he keeps his own retarded, obsolete nationalism."

I willingly change the anouncemnt of the Turkish Ministry of Truth : "Ne mutlu müsülmanım diyene!" .

As to my pockets where I sometimes cram my documents , when I see a Moslem and a Turkified Pomac call the contents of my documents , "retarded obsolete nationalism" I find much comfort and confirmation of their value in this condemnation , since the worst thing I can face is being praised by a Moslem , be he a high ranking Turkified Pomac Fifth Columnist or a pedestrian Moslem chameleon.

---

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".