"The more words you use the wronger you are." A new Turkish criterion of truth

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Aug 3, 2010 at 16:26

Lazman wrote :

> Ianus, you obviously don't count on anyone to follow up on your ... postings designed to try and see how much mud would stick each time.<

There were four other Turks here (Kaan,Anon, Hikmet Pala & Vehbi Cam) who tried to wash away that mud but in the meantime they seem to have rather drowned in it. You're the last to keep afloat only because you play fool, carefully avoiding to face any negative source and get deeper into the stinking quagmire of Turkish lies and crimes. You produce also an amazing amount of fog and bubbles around you in the process.

Anyway, I'd like to thank you for taking my advice seriously and omitting ANY relevant comment on the questions and documents I adduced in my previous ... postings carping instead at this or that tertiary or quartiary point of feelings and number of words (not their sense!) used. But what else can be expected from you ?

>The ridiculous allegation about Ibrahim Akyol was too weird not to read up and follow up on.<

Do you find killing people going out of a church by admirers of Ataturk and dreamers of Allah's paradise 'ridiculous' ? Very interesting although hardly ridiculous !

> Your words exactly, including the underlining and italicizing to somehow emphasize the correlation of "Ataturk and Mohammed friends forever" were the following: A picture of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the Turkish Republic, bearing the handwritten words "I hate foreigners" was also reportedly found on Akyol.

Here's what the note on the back of the Ataturk's picture actually says in Turkish: "Yurdumu ve vatanımı seviyorum. Benim gibi düşünen herkesin yanındayım ancak bu düşüncemin karşısında duran insanlar vatanımdan defolsun." [Translation: I love my country and my homeland. I stand by all those who think similarly and those who oppose my thoughts should get out of my homeland.] Not the "I hate foreigners," as you made up.<

Let me quote a leading Turkish newspaper - "Hurrieyt" - which I followed adducing the words published by this newspaper on Tuesday, July 28, 2009

" Early reports of the murder indicated the chief suspect was deranged and that this was a random act that had nothing to do with Kerkeling's identity as a foreigner. "Among the few facts we know, this is one," we wrote last Thursday. Unfortunately, subsequent investigation by police is now leading to other conclusions. And they are chilling.

"I wanted to kill a Christian that day and was visiting churches for this reason," the suspect, İbrahim Akyol, told the police. "I saw this person and killed him." A written message on the back of a photograph was also allegedly found on Akyol. It read: "I hate foreigners."

I read it last year but couldn't find it at once so for convenience's sake I referred to "Islamization Watch". I remembered this statement "I hate foreigners" very well.

If you accuse me therefore in public of making up statements which I quote from a reliable Turkish source , then it's up to you to prove in public that "Hurrieyt" made up Akyol's statement "I hate foreigners" ! Won't you forget that in your reply ? Your Turkish memory seems so fragile , doesn't it ?

I'd like to add one more thing on your quote. Unlike you I am no fan of counting words and letters to draw silly conclusions as to the validity or invalidity of a statement. But by way of exception let me count the words and letters allegedly written on the back of Ataturk's picture – 17 words, 121 letters including full stops. Quite a long message on a picture which was carried in a pocket , isn't it , even provided it was written in very small letters. It must look rather like a postcard message and not a motto. Did they reproduce the picture and specify its size ? Did you see it and the message ? Its length makes it suspect while a short message adduced by "Hurrieyt" on 28.07.2009 looks more likely and adequate .

>In fact, most Turks would even interpret that photo and message as an anti-Islamist message.<

If it had been anti-Islamist, then why didn't he go to a mosque and start a row with the local imam about the superiority of secularism over Islam and then kill somebody going out of the place? Anyway, it's a grotesque anti-Islamist message of someone who confesses according to Hurrieyt's report : ""I wanted to kill a Christian that day and was visiting churches for this reason". If what you write were true , then every time a Christian is slaughtered in Turkey (and this happens not so rarely ) we may consider it as a triumph of the anti-Islamist secularist forces, may we not , Lazman , according to your own perverted semantics ?

> But that reality does not help your nonsensical argument to form an Islamist/Ataturk correlation here, does it?<

Don't you mean by "reality" "a Turkish parody of reality or its ignorance" ? How could you otherwise defend and keep spreading your Turkish lies despite all the evidence against them ?

Let me take a brief look at the methodology of Turkish lies . A Turk states something which is ALWAYS meant to glorify or whitewash Turkey. When confronted with doubts and contrary facts, a Turk impudently denies them. When the arguments are irrefutable and he can no longer deny them , he refuses to look at them and ignores them and changes the topic - feelings, number of words used, wrong nationality of the skeptic of Turkish virtue etc. When reminded of his tactics he ignores both the facts and the reminder and keeps repeating the lies. A vicious circle , isn't it ?

So now you come up with your " reality does not help your nonsensical argument" , don't you ? Well, my impression has always been the Moslem Turkish notions of "reality" and "sense" and semantics in general differ radically t from what they mean in the civilized non-Moslem countries just as the Turkish methodology does differ from theirs. So e.g. why are you Turks punished in Turkey with 4 years in jail if you don't repeat standard Turkish lies and doubt Turkish propaganda ? The thought crime is called "denigration of Turkishness " and is covered by article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code , isn't it ?

> Further, as you conveniently omitted, this Akyol guy was released from a mental hospital after 5 months and, after his early release he was rejected by everyone and was living in the streets for months.<

And living for months in the streets he was carrying Ataturk's picture in his pocket (it must have been badly worn down as a result) together with a kitchen knife with which he slaughtered Kerkeling ? As a believing Moslem he must have attended regularly mosque servives . No news from his local imam and co-religionists , his former commanders in the army , school teachers ?

> His actual statement to the police was "I woke up angry that morning and carried a knife thinking I would kill someone."

And your source is ... ? It's interesting that Hurrieyt and all other sources I know have quite a differnt quote from yours and that they explictly state he was looking for his victim in a church where he refused to take off his cap and tried to start a debate on the superiority of Islam over Christianity. It's seems that someone in 99,8% Islamized Turkey did his best to hush up the whole thing.

> Obviously, a sick and a desperate man who should not have been released from a psychiatric institution.

But little could even Akyol have imagined that his horrendous murder of a Christian would be used by another distressed mind 1.5 years later; one who hears in the early morning the whisper "I hate foreigners" and "must kill Christian" to somehow concoct an absurdly senseless and childish connection of Ataturk and Islamists. But one has to admire your total bravado smart ending …… and then stabs a Christian to keep his promise made to Islam and Ataturk."

It's a logical conclusion of the whole episode , isn't it ? As a Turk you're brain-washed from your earliest childhood both by the absurd cult of Mohammed and the absurd cult of Ataturk so that when you grow up the two totally control your mind and actions. They somehow must converge to produce corresponding actions.

Although I have a Turkish source while you have not quoted a single one you triumphantly conclude : "another distressed mind 1.5 years later [...] who hears in the early morning the whisper "I hate foreigners" and "must kill Christian" to somehow concoct an absurdly senseless and childish connection of Ataturk and Islamists."

Now, Lazman, in a normal world it is he who asserts something without disclosing his source who is thought to "concoct things". In your inverted Turkish world it is the other way around .

> What is wrong with you? You failed to spot your next "smear opportunity" to form the "Ataturk, Mohammed and Hitler friends forever" correlation.<

No, I hoped that one day you'd grow up to see this correlation himself and make a corresponding posting on this forum. Forlorn hope, what ?

> I guess you missed the other news items that this poor soul was a German running from the justice (escaped from a prison in Germany) and was hiding out in Turkey.<

And how does it touch the case? Did Akyol kill him because Allah and/or Ataturk knew the man had escaped a prison or what ? A Moslem carrying a picture of Ataturk with a hateful motto kills a man going out of church for quite a different reason than that . And as to criminals on the run Turkey - but especially Northern Cyprus - is full of them. But somehow "Christian fanatics" don't kill them when they leave their local mosque, do they ?

> In fact, the Islamization Watch site you cited has the translation almost identical to what I provided above and states the guy had mental problems. Obviously worrying about personal credibility is not an issue for you. <

Strange 'mental problems' if one considers the action and its circumstances. In Turkey people take Islam's and Kemal's teaching quite literally and they act accordingly. And so the most serious mental problem for Turkey is no doubt Islam and Kemalism more than alleged paint thinner .

> Also, don't bother referencing any European Institution decisions to make a case when you yourself already declared .

Are you questioning and denying the 1976 findings of the European Commission for Human Rights because they expose the Turkish lies and crimes better than anything else and so are incompatble with the Turkish parody of reality ? Well , in 1976 Turkey ignored them too but not on the grounds that in 2010 a Polack named "Ianus" would denounce the Hague Trials as a "farce". You Turks have a thousand ways of lying and a good lie is much better for you than a bad truth, isn't it? You can NEVER face any negative evidence. I repeat this is the most hateful thing about you Turks. You think that your lies improve your case. Instead they only aggravate it!

> The Hague Trials as a farce back in March; I told you several times, you can't have it both ways as you try to cherry-pick data.<

It's not me who finds the Hague Trials a farce. You don't have to be a lawyer to see it was a political show trial which was not intended to find those responsible for the war but punish a few scapegoats.You mix up things, Lazman , to deflect from your pro-Turkish lies and NEVER face the negative evidence.

> The same can be said about the "impeccable" logic you have used to portray USA as a "bad Christian" country that uses Islamist armies to massacre Christians. Your words: "US …helped the Moslems (….) massacre and expel the Serbs" or "… aggressive anti-Christian US record on the Balkans (supporting openly Islam, giving away to jihadists ancient Christian lands, creating Islamic states ….. at the expense of Christian Serbia ....." And obviously you refer to USA manipulation of Turkey to invade (and massacre, I am sure) Cyprus ad nauseam.

Where is my statement factually wrong ? Isn't the US predominatly a Christian nation ? Didn't it destroy despite that another Christian nation on the Balkans to form two Moslem states on its ruin ? I suggest you watch a documentary or two on how the Bosniak and Albanian Moslems have imitated in Kosovo their Turkish brethren from Northern Cyprus. A more apt comparison than between "Israel in Gaza vs. Turks in Cyprus" would be "Turks in Cyprus vs. Albanians in Kosovo".

> To a direct question about heritage, you come back with 1147 words of non-answer, and a lot of your usual tap-dancing verbiage, which highlights another deep rooted problem you are clearly struggling with. <

Details, please !

> Although in every conflict to date, the losing side is full of hatred and complains for generations about atrocities committed by the other side, I admit I may be wrong about the Greek Cypriot. I don't believe even if very angry, a self-respecting Greek Cypriot would stoop to disparage the PM and founder of modern Greece, Venizelos, by claiming it is "…parody dictated to aging Venizelos by a desire to please England and France…" to invalidate Venizelos' submission of Ataturk's name for the Nobel Peace Prize, especially after demonizing Ataturk in your following words …. Ataturk had c. 1 000 000 Greeks murdered in Asia Minor but no Turk remembers having burnt alive Greeks or decapitated and slaughtering them in Smyrna… But I forget, in "Ianus' world," blaming past or present powers liberates you out of any circumstances.

Your ignorance of Hellenic history is both understandablepardonable and . After all you're just a Turk with all it implies. But still how many Greek people did Ghazi Mustafa Kemal Pasha Ataturk kill according to your Turkish history school books ? They mention none , so none was massacred by Kemal , what ?

> So far in about 10 days you have posted 40 or more times with 10s and thousands of words and interestingly, in an earlier posting to me you basically described this prolific effort as "working hard".

Lazman, I was wrong. You're a great thinker ! You say that the more words one writes the wronger one is , don't you! I congratulate you on a new criterion of truth ! It's absolutely amazing. Who could have invented it unless a proud Turk like you ?

>I am sure you'll do a fine job in the future as well.

May I rely on your forgetfulness in the future , Lazman? You know what I mean , don't you ?

---

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".