Support NeoGAF

[danm999]

Bit surprised to see there's a choking woman defence force but also a bit not surprised.

 

[PhantomThief]

I soo don't wanna derail the thread as anti-Tayyip Turk but can't help myself here we go.

First you are equating ethnicity to national identity. For example ethnically I'm Turkic / Slavic (Bosnian) / Georgian yet my nationality is Turkish thus I'm %100 a Turk and perfectly happy to be one. The oath does not say "how great it is to be ethnically Turkic", it says "how happy is the one who says I'm Turk (as in the part of the Turkish nation) Ziya Gokalp also known as the "father of Turkish Nationalism" was ethnically a Kurd so was the 2nd president İsmet İnönü (the on after Ataturk), yet they were hardcore Turkish nationalists Mindblown yet? if not I'll advise you to check news of recently passed Levon Panos Dabağyan, an ethnic armenian who is also one the main founders & ideologues of ultra nationalist "Nationalist Movement" Party in Turkey. Confused let me explain.

The term "Turk" meant Muslim subject of the Ottoman Empire before, a Turkic christian orthodox was not considered a Turk, he did belong to the Orthodox Nation of Empire (millet). Turkish nationalists wanted to change that. They envisaged an inclusive type of nationalism (much like the American one) where anyone who pledge allegiance to the Turkish nation could claim to be a Turk regardless of their ethnic or religious background. That's why it says "happy who says that I'm a Turk" instead of "happy who is a Turk. Of course it did not work for everyone, of course it was a painful process but it did create the "Turkish Nation" as we understand today. And yes the oath you talk about was totally inspired by American Pledge of Allegiance.


not westernization but I see the ideals of enlightenment to be universal ones so in a way yes. And I didn't call him mahatma, I called him a "despot" and for a reason.


No shop has ever had to have his poster so please stop with your exaggerations and about the insults maybe you remember Turkey of 10-20 years ago but now hurling insults at him and slandering his name has become the favorite pastime of every Islamist in the country.


So he & his party ruled from 1923-1938 but he is directly responsible for massacres of 1915, okay dude.


He is the guy who said “My people are going to learn the principles of democracy the dictates of truth and the teachings of science" but he had nothing democratic in his political thought, okay. He worked his whole life to turn Turkey in to an unitary nation-state based on the principles of secular democracy but he had nothing democratic in praxis, rolleyey.gif



so why not just show me the quote of Hitler saying "My biggest inspiration for my political ideology is Ataturk" This way I can tell my neo-nazi friends that the biggest inspiration for their ideology was an oriental muslim man named Mustapha Qamal. Again the paper you linked & Ihrig's book which the paper quotes only has 4 tangential quotes him praising Ataturk as a nationalist & secularist yet somehow he is his biggest inspiration for Hitler my final rolleyes ookaaay. and I'm done with you.

Wow, killed it! Great post and a good history lesson .

 

[leroidys]

Turkish embassy statement:

Are you fucking kidding me?

edit: source?

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

I'm guessing you don't know the nature of that outlet.

The info that the woman being strangled was Yazidi came from this outlet.

 

[johnsmith]

Are you fucking kidding me?

edit: source?

The embassy itself.

http://vasington.be.mfa.gov.tr/ShowAnnouncement.aspx?ID=330959

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

The term "Turk" meant Muslim subject of the Ottoman Empire before, a Turkic christian orthodox was not considered a Turk, he did belong to the Orthodox Nation of Empire (millet). Turkish nationalists wanted to change that. They envisaged an inclusive type of nationalism (much like the American one) where anyone who pledge allegiance to the Turkish nation could claim to be a Turk regardless of their ethnic or religious background. That's why it says "happy who says that I'm a Turk" instead of "happy who is a Turk. Of course it did not work for everyone, of course it was a painful process but it did create the "Turkish Nation" as we understand today. And yes the oath you talk about was totally inspired by American Pledge of Allegiance.

You seems to separate turkish nationalism in a modern nation state with turkish as a racial concept which is absurd. If it was so inclusive, why the kurdish language was banned until recently in school and public tv ?
American don't designate a race or a language, it's not comparable at all with the turkish identity. Maybe it was in the Ottoman Empire but not in kemalism.

This is rich. Everybody is bashing me as an anti kurds but i am the one rejecting turkish nationalism which is responsible of the whole turks-kurds issue in the first place.

It's why progressive western discourse is falling flat in front of the contradiction of kemalism. From one hand they support secularism, from the other kurds. The problem is that kemalism enforce secularism AND oppression against kurds and everything not turkish.
It's getting clearly worst if we bring the armenian genocide into the equation, most kemalists don't even recognize it and blame it on the armenians themselves.

not westernization but I see the ideals of enlightenment to be universal ones so in a way yes. And I didn't call him mahatma, I called him a "despot" and for a reason.

The ideals of enlightenment have a genealogy and a geography. When Ataturk banned the turkish hat and muslim veil and force westernization IN CLOTHING, how it is universal enlightenment ? How changing the arabic script to the latin one is a universal move ? Is latin script more close to human essence ?

No shop has ever had to have his poster so please stop with your exaggerations and about the insults maybe you remember Turkey of 10-20 years ago but now hurling insults at him and slandering his name has become the favorite pastime of every Islamist in the country.

Various shopkeepers told me that in Istanbul in 2010.
Yes now thanks to God is different and you can hear a critical discourse against Ataturk legacy and character. It was near to impossible to find 10 years ago.

So he & his party ruled from 1923-1938 but he is directly responsible for massacres of 1915, okay dude.

I never said spoke about him but his political party and you know that. You just want to hide the responsibility of his political party (Union and Progress) in the armenian genocide.

Also if you really want to see his implication in the same kind of act, you can read this. This armenian website call him the "consumer and finisher of the armenian genocide".

He is the guy who said ”My people are going to learn the principles of democracy the dictates of truth and the teachings of science" but he had nothing democratic in his political thought, okay. He worked his whole life to turn Turkey in to an unitary nation-state based on the principles of secular democracy but he had nothing democratic in praxis, rolleyey.gif

So i guess that North Korea, which official name is "Democratic People's Republic of Korea", is truly a democratic republic.

If you speak about democracy but impose a one-party state dictatorship, what does that make you ?

so why not just show me the quote of Hitler saying "My biggest inspiration for my political ideology is Ataturk" This way I can tell my neo-nazi friends that the biggest inspiration for their ideology was an oriental muslim man named Mustapha Qamal. Again the paper you linked & Ihrig's book which the paper quotes only has 4 tangential quotes him praising Ataturk as a nationalist & secularist yet somehow he is his biggest inspiration for Hitler my final rolleyes ookaaay. and I'm done with you.

Yes no problem. You can read Hitler relationship with Ataturk in the light of the armenian genocide here. Nazi went as far as considering that armenians were the jews of Turkey to justify the action of the political party of Ataturk against them.

And there you go for a direct quotation :

"A decade on, in 1933, Hitler would tell the Turkish daily Milliyet that Atatürk was, in his words, ”the greatest man of the century," and confess to the paper that in the ”dark 1920s" ”the successful struggle for liberation that [Atatürk] led in order to create Turkey had given him the confidence that the National Socialist movement would be successful as well." Hitler called the Turkish movement his ”shining star." In 1938, on his birthday, Hitler would tell journalists and politicians that ”Atatürk was the first to show that it is possible to mobilize and regenerate the resources that a country has lost. In this respect Atatürk was a teacher. Mussolini was his first and I his second student."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/11/24/the-20th-century-dictator-most-idolized-by-hitler

 

[Futureman]

Just saw a friend post this to their FB. Pretty crazy.

Reading through here a bit it sounds like the police are still investigating exactly what happened... in the embassy statement above, who are the PKK? are they U.S. citizens?

 

[Stinkles]

Just saw a friend post this to their FB. Pretty crazy.

Reading through here a bit it sounds like the police are still investigating exactly what happened... in the embassy statement above, who are the PKK? are they U.S. citizens?

Kurdish separatist group in Turkey. Responsible for lots of terrorism but also a red herring thrown out by Erdogan (and Pigeon) every time his toast gets cold. Along with boogeyman Gulen.

 

[.JayZii]

That was more intense than I was expecting.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Kurdish separatist group in Turkey. Responsible for lots of terrorism but also a red herring thrown out by Erdogan (and Pigeon) every time his toast gets cold. Along with boogeyman Gulen.

I don't understand how it's not justified to speak out against PKK. I am not imagining thing when you see clear support of PKK linked personality from those demonstrators. I wonder how everybody would felt if it was a demonstration showing support for AQ/ISIS-linked personnality. Well in Turkey, most people consider PKK to be as worst as AQ/ISIS because they suffered a lot from constant terrorist attack from PKK or offshots.

I don't personally equate both group fundamentally. I think that ISIS and Al Qaida is a terrorist group by essence while PKK is a nationalist group who use terrorists methods. They can accept political compromise and could be a rational political actor in the future who could abandon terrorists means, unlike AQ/ISIS. But i totally understand why a turk could not make that distinction.
More problematic would be their stalinist ideology for the people who would have to live under their rules.

 

[blu]

No, please read again. I am saying exactly the same thing about what have occured to me with zionists about what is occurring to those PKK supporters. It was to point out that if i am supporting violence against them, i would be supporting violence against myself.

Ok, I understand that line of reference now.

This is the problem with this issue. A lot of people don't know shit about Turkey or kurds politics. They just see kurds are the good guys and that it. Some hollywood level of political analysis. So if i am saying that those people are not simply "kurds" but YPG/PKK supporters, for those ignorants i am just being anti-kurdish or supporting violence.

Let's get to that line of thinking in a sec.

If the title or the OP would specify that it was a pro-PKK/YPG demonstration, i wouldn't have said nothing except condemning it.

So for you that demonstration has been straight YPG/PKK (since you insist PKK = YPG), and no other possible motives for Americans of Kurdish origin to be upset with the visit of Erdogan other than being PKK supporters?

How about this: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/04/turkey-arrests-pro-kurdish-party-leaders-mps

..You know, your line of thinking reminds me very much of the official explanation of the Sublime Porte re the Armenian genocide at the time: 'Those Armenians were all Russian sympathizers, so we needed to take measures against them.'

 

[Johnny Cage In The Shower]

For those of you just entering this thread...

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Ok, I understand that line of reference now.


Let's get to that line of thinking in a sec.


So for you that demonstration has been straight YPG/PKK (since you insist PKK = YPG), and no other possible motives for Americans of Kurdish origin to be upset with the visit of Erdogan other than being PKK supporters?

How about this: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/04/turkey-arrests-pro-kurdish-party-leaders-mps

..You know, your line of thinking reminds me very much of the official explanation of the Sublime Porte re the Armenian genocide at the time: 'Those Armenians were all Russian sympathizers, so we needed to take measures against them.'

You're just not following the discussion from the beginning. Of course any turks/kurds/human being could find one thousand reason to protest against Erdogan.

The issue here are the post signs who were displayed during the demonstration who make reference to a particular HDP member who is linked directly with PYD and PKK [It's actually the same man your article from the guardian make reference, Selahattin Demirtaş].

The links between PYD[YPG] and PKK are evident, i already posted many articles and pictures that show this, the reference of PKK leadership within PYD are everywhere. They are not the same organization, but the YPG is a PKK offshoot and they are allies.

Here you can find the leader of the PYD saying that they adopt the ideas of the "estimated PKK leader [Ocalan]"

Of course, since you don't have anything clever to say, let's just throw the accusation of being like an apologist of the armenian genocide. It's free and nobody will bother.

 

[blu]

You're just not following the discussion from the beginning. Of course any turks/kurds/human being could find one thousand reason to protest against Erdogan.

Seems we might have common ground for discussion then..

The issue here are the post signs who were displayed during the demonstration who make reference to a particular HDP member who is linked directly with PYD and PKK [It's actually the same man your article from the guardian make reference, Selahattin Demirtaş].

Enemy of the State, I see. Not a Gulenist, mind you, but still a formidable enemy..

The links between PYD[YPG] and PKK are evident, i already posted many articles and pictures that show this, the reference of PKK leadership within PYD are everywhere. They are not the same organization, but the YPG is a PKK offshoot and they are allies.

I'm not questioning the links between organisations - surely one Kurdish organisation will have some form of links or interactions with another Kurdish organisation, especially at times of political turmoil. I'm questioning your equating of the organisations. You seem to operate under keyword matches - 'He said PKK!' That's a typical MO for a witch hunt. Which is what, low and behold, Erdogan has been doing for a while now - tagging opponents with various 'enemy of the state' monikers and persecuting them based on that.

Of course, since you don't have anything clever to say, let's just throw the accusation of being like an apologist of the armenian genocide. It's free and nobody will bother.

My apologies, I'm not a particularly clever person. But you posts surely come out as apologetic of the recent shameful events. Re Armenian genocide - you're imagining things, I just said your line of reasoning reminded me of those.

 

[PtM]

Bit surprised to see there's a choking woman defence force but also a bit not surprised.

I swear, you better not be talking about me.

 

[Chuckie]

I know diplomats have diplomatic immunity, but does that also include these fucking thugs?
Are security personal (or whatever the fuck these are) considered diplomats?

 

[Stinkles]

I don't understand how it's not justified to speak out against PKK. I am not imagining thing when you see clear support of PKK linked personality from those demonstrators. I wonder how everybody would felt if it was a demonstration showing support for AQ/ISIS-linked personnality. Well in Turkey, most people consider PKK to be as worst as AQ/ISIS because they suffered a lot from constant terrorist attack from PKK or offshots.

I don't personally equate both group fundamentally. I think that ISIS and Al Qaida is a terrorist group by essence while PKK is a nationalist group who use terrorists methods. They can accept political compromise and could be a rational political actor in the future who could abandon terrorists means, unlike AQ/ISIS. But i totally understand why a turk could not make that distinction.
More problematic would be their stalinist ideology for the people who would have to live under their rules.

Nobody is stopping you talking about PKK. They've done horrible, horrible things. But they've also been used as an excuse by Erdogan and other politicians for the slo-mo destruction of the Turkish democracy.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Enemy of the State, I see. Not a Gulenist, mind you, but still a formidable enemy..

He was not an enemy of the state until 2014 and the YPG took over of an important part of Syria which lead to an escalation which lead to PKK resuming the war and the end of the peace process. That show you the absurdity of politics sometime. The same goes for Gulen.

I'm not questioning the links between organisations - surely one Kurdish organisation will have some form of links or interactions with another Kurdish organisation, especially at times of political turmoil. I'm questioning your equating of the organisations. You seem to operate under keyword matches - 'He said PKK!' That's a typical MO for a witch hunt. Which is what, low and behold, Erdogan has been doing for a while now - tagging opponents with various 'enemy of the state' monikers and prosecuting them based on that.

Most of kurdish organisation hate /are in war with PKK/YPG. You have a general kurdish hate in Turkey right now and politicians (especially nationalists) would use the recent attack of PKK outshot in Turkey to fuel their racist agendas. I am not at all equating all kurdish organization under the same umbrella. I am in favor of Kurdish autonomy and i was very happy with the peace process. I think PKK saw a historical opportunity with the syrian civil war and they took it. Or maybe Erdogan feared that they will take it so he striked first: In any case it's a big shame.

My apologies, I'm not a particularly clever person. But you posts surely come out as apologetic of the recent shameful events. Re Armenian genocide - you're imagining things, I just said your line of reasoning reminded me of those.

I am not at all, and i said it various times. I said that those suited men were thugs and should be prosecuted/banned from the USA. But GAF sometime cannot take nuance so if i am pointing out that their groups are showing support to terrorist/dictatorship affiliated groups, i become an apologist of those acts.

I do think that AKP was a good thing for Turkey and the region until 2014 and the irruption of the syrian civil war into turkish politics, without cleaning Erdogan responsability in this. Worst and more worrying is the situation now since the failed coup attempt. It's pretty sad and i think things will be getting worst.

 

[JZA]

Definitely fucked up, although I wouldn't blame them if the next time these Kurdish protesters showed up they were all wearing sparring gear to protect themselves.

 

[shandy706]

Whoa that's a fuckin brawl. WTF?

Yeah, I have no idea who is who and what is going on...lol.

Need some kind of clarification/play by play.

 

[PtM]

Yeah, I have no idea who is who and what is going on...lol.

Need some kind of clarification/play by play.

Red flags are pro Erdogan. Other side are Kurdish YPG. Suits and armed are Erdogan's thugs or embassy personnel.

 

[blu]

He was not an enemy of the state until 2014 and the YPG took over of an important part of Syria which lead to an escalation which lead to PKK resuming the war and the end of the peace process. That show you the absurdity of politics sometime. The same goes for Gulen.

Wait, wait, Demirtas is HDP. You keep insisting that since YPG (and by transitivity - PKK) supporters demand his release he must be a PKK leader? I mean, if HDP - a parliamentary Turkish party, is yet another 'Kurdish terrorist organisation', then which are those Kurdish political organisations within Turkey that you'd consider non-terrorist?

And he (or shall we say his party, HDP) has been targeted by Erdogan for about a year now: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-20971100

Most of kurdish organisation hate /are in war with PKK/YPG.

Wait, how are most Kurdish organisations at war with PKK/YPG, if Demirtas - a prominent figure from the most popular Kurdish party in Turky - HDP, is also very popular among PKK/YPG people, as per all those evidences you've presented in this thread? Do Kurds also hate / are at war with HDP? You have me confused.

You have a general kurdish hate in Turkey right now and politicians (especially nationalists) would use the recent attack of PKK outshot in Turkey to fuel their racist agendas.

Hasn't this been going for years now?

I am not at all equating all kurdish organization under the same umbrella.

You still manage to get me confused, though.

I am in favor of Kurdish autonomy and i was very happy with the peace process. I think PKK saw a historical opportunity with the syrian civil war and they took it. Or maybe Erdogan feared that they will take it so he striked first: In any case it's a big shame.

Here we totally agree. What is an ever bigger shame, in my eyes, is the support Erdogan is still getting by some Turks, and by some non-Turk Muslims. Erdogan is dragging Turkish society to the bottom, and idiots are still cheering him. Dark times ahead indeed.

I am not at all, and i said it various times. I said that those suited men were thugs and should be prosecuted/banned from the USA. But GAF sometime cannot take nuance so if i am pointing out that their groups are showing support to terrorist/dictatorship affiliated groups, i become an apologist of those acts.

Frankly, the only support those protesters have demonstrated to me is for a political leader persecuted by Erdogan.

I do think that AKP was a good thing for Turkey and the region until 2014 and the irruption of the syrian civil war into turkish politics, without cleaning Erdogan responsability in this. Worst and more worrying is the situation now since the failed coup attempt. It's pretty sad and i think things will be getting worst.

You think the split between Erdogan and Gulen brought to the current state of AKP being a clearly reactionary party? Perhaps Gulen was the progressive force in that alliance?

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Wait, wait, Demirtas is HDP. You keep insisting that since YPG (and by transitivity - PKK) supporters demand his release he must be a PKK leader? I mean, if HDP - a parliamentary Turkish party, is yet another 'Kurdish terrorist organisation', then which are those Kurdish political organisations within Turkey that you'd consider non-terrorist?

I won't reply to the rest because you just showed that you didn't followed the discussion since the beginning and honestly i don't think there is any value in following this discussion.

Demirtas is not ONLY hdp. I don't consider HDP to be a terrorist organization at all.
I consider that every kurdish organization that are not linked with terrorists organizations or don't undertake terrorists actions to be valuable and noble organization, simple no ?
BUT he supported PKK and YPG and made political rally for them.

Another picture, in case you call it fake:

 

[jellies_two]

Audio analysis claims commands to attack can be heard

http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/18/audio-analysis-erdogan-goons-were-told-to-attack-protesters-video/

 

[Funyarinpa]

Let's go one by one.
[/QUOTE]

You seems to separate turkish nationalism in a modern nation state with turkish as a racial concept which is absurd. If it was so inclusive, why the kurdish language was banned until recently in school and public tv ?
American don't designate a race or a language, it's not comparable at all with the turkish identity. Maybe it was in the Ottoman Empire but not in kemalism.

I'm willing to concede here that Kemalism led to the erasure of the cultures of ethnicities in law, and I would not disagree with the right of speaking Kurdish in school, but the problem here is not with Kemalism- Kemalism pushed the Turkish identity because the unity that came from that sense of shared nationality was needed for the Turkish War of Independence.

It's why progressive western discourse is falling flat in front of the contradiction of kemalism. From one hand they support secularism, from the other kurds. The problem is that kemalism enforce secularism AND oppression against kurds and everything not turkish.
It's getting clearly worst if we bring the armenian genocide into the equation, most kemalists don't even recognize it and blame it on the armenians themselves.

Kemalism encourages to take pride in one's nation, culture and history. Obviously, as a Turk, he'd frame those statements from a Turkish perspective. That's not "oppressing everything not Turkish".

I don't deny that other legislation might have caused oppression. But that's not what Kemalism's foundation is. It's pride in being Turkish, which would obviously be supported by a Turkish government.

The ideals of enlightenment have a genealogy and a geography. When Ataturk banned the turkish hat and muslim veil and force westernization IN CLOTHING, how it is universal enlightenment ? How changing the arabic script to the latin one is a universal move ? Is latin script more close to human essence ?

Hoo boy. This is my favorite out of the fucking bunch. "Universal enlightenment" does not mean "enlightenment that is not associated with culture and history in any way", it means "enlightenment that is far-reaching and permanent".

-Clothing was changed in order to promote a more modern appearance, and to progress in general modernization of society. It both enforced hats in governmental positions (sensible to me) and stressed that the Turkish society do the same (which I can see as being problematic).
-Religious garments were banned in order to unite the divided members of the Turkish society. The official reason given also includes the motive that this would keep religion strictly an internal matter of conscience.

-The Latin alphabet was chosen over the Arabic one for several reasons:
1. It's used by European countries- this makes communication, cultural/scientific exchange, language learning a lot easier.
2. The Arabic alphabet was phonetically unsuitable for Turkish.
3. Learning to read and write in Arabic was so difficult that the general literacy ratio pre-Alphabet Reform is generally cited as 3% for men and 0.7% for women (this is general knowledge). This, of course, greatly constrained education and the development of culture. The alphabet was changed to make the Turkish society more educated.

Various shopkeepers told me that in Istanbul in 2010.
Yes now thanks to God is different and you can hear a critical discourse against Ataturk legacy and character. It was near to impossible to find 10 years ago.

Yet thanks to your God, secularism and democracy are being undermined in this country day by day. Discourse about Atatürk's actions are not bringing about greater awareness of minorities and their important place in the Turkish society, they are only driving this country toward extremism and dictatorship. The negative aspects of Kemalism could be debated, but now is not the suitable time for that, when half the country is advocating for stripping secularism from governmental institutions and education. The positive effects of Kemalism are under attack in today's Turkey, and you are trying to portray that as a wonderful thing.

Also if you really want to see his implication in the same kind of act, you can read this. This armenian website call him the "consumer and finisher of the armenian genocide".

Reserving judgment of this one, my knowledge of history portrays Cilicia and the others mentioned as wars and not massacres. I'd need to look that one up. (Likewise for the Armenian genocide as a whole- I'd like sources advocating for either side regarding the genocide.)

If you speak about democracy but impose a one-party state dictatorship, what does that make you ?

...Says the person ignorant of the fact that Atatürk himself promoted the creation of other parties after the declaration of independence.

Oh, by the way, no one shits on your precious Islam here because of ISIS using it as the excuse for terrorism and war. Likewise, Hitler's thoughts don't have any inherent meaning with regards to the legitimacy of Atatürk's intentions or methods.

 

[Jackpot]

Erdogan was watching the attack.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2017-05-18/erdogan-watched-attack-on-protesters-in-dc

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan watches as protesters are attacked in Washington, D.C.

Also, when someone enters a thread by stating "I'm not defending the beating of protesters, but..." you can bet your ass they know exactly what they're intending to achieve, as evidenced by half the thread now being about an unrelated matter.

 

[Keasar]

I JUST heard about this on The Daily Show, HOW is this not bigger news!?

Erdogans OWN bodyguards ran up and started beating American protesters, in America, on American soil.

HOW is he not banned forever from the country!? This should be treated more or less as a attack on American citizens by another country.

 

[RPGCrazied]

I JUST heard about this on The Daily Show, HOW is this not bigger news!?

All of the Trump disasters are much louder and more frequent. Its hard to cover all of it. But yeah, this needs to be talked about.

 

[norinrad]

I JUST heard about this on The Daily Show, HOW is this not bigger news!?

Erdogans OWN bodyguards ran up and started beating American protesters, in America, on American soil.

HOW is he not banned forever from the country!? This should be treated more or less as a attack on American citizens by another country.

Why should it be big news? This should not surprise you at all. The US needs Turkish Bases to bomb the shit out of Syria and is doing all they can to keep Erdogan happy.

 

[PtM]

Erdogan was watching the attack.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2017-05-18/erdogan-watched-attack-on-protesters-in-dc

Looks like he was to enter the embassy and stayed in his car until security gave clearance.

 

[Funyarinpa]

I JUST heard about this on The Daily Show, HOW is this not bigger news!?

Erdogans OWN bodyguards ran up and started beating American protesters, in America, on American soil.

HOW is he not banned forever from the country!? This should be treated more or less as a attack on American citizens by another country.

I'm saying this as a Turkish citizen- this really fucking angers me on the behalf of Americans. This is completely unacceptable. Even beyond its obvious implications for you, it's also a display of power for us unfortunate souls stuck under his rule. He'll use this to create the impression that he can fuck around in the US and "The West" won't lift a finger.

Please, please, please make this have repercussions. PLEASE.

 

[jellies_two]

Looks like he was to enter the embassy and stayed in his car until security gave clearance.

Gave clearance that the fight that he ordered was over with.

 

[Xexros]

Is your point that the people demonstrating had it coming? Because I can see little this has to do with protesters being nearly stomped to death by Turkish security on American soil.

Unlike turkey, America is still a functioning democracy. Even with trump. They all weren't pkk.. and even if they were all. This isn't turkey. You can't just beat up dissenters or suppress opposing ideas.

It's funny, considering that's exactly what the left is doing across college campuses in this country. Carry on...

 

[Ozigizo]

It's funny, considering that's exactly what the left is doing across college campuses in this country. Carry on...

Ok, junior.

 

[Funyarinpa]

It's funny, considering that's exactly what the left is doing across college campuses in this country. Carry on...

The idea is that this is a violation of America's national sovereignty. It isn't about "beating up protesters", it's about *a political figure beating up protesters who are citizens of another country.*

 

[Xexros]

Ok, junior.

Oh no! Junior?!?

🙄

 

[Malvolio]

It's funny, considering that's exactly what the left is doing across college campuses in this country. Carry on...

See guys, both sides are the same!

 

[dallow_bg]

Oh no! Junior?!?

🙄

Or Alt-Account. Whichever you like better while you're protecting your real account.

 

[Keasar]

The idea is that this is a violation of America's national sovereignty. It isn't about "beating up protesters", it's about *a political figure beating up protesters who are citizens of another country.*

*While IN that other country.*

I'm not even American, nor anywhere near America, and I am still offended by this whole thing. And that is also when setting aside that I hate Erdogan for screwing over his own country while also making shit a pain for us other Europeans.

 

[Jackpot]

It's funny, considering that's exactly what the left is doing across college campuses in this country. Carry on...

Citation needed.

Also, for other posters, all you need to know:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=184390706#post184390706

 

[Cyanity]

Are you fucking kidding me?

edit: source?

This sounds like something straight out of Spicer's mouth. Guess Trump learned from the best.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

-Clothing was changed in order to promote a more modern appearance, and to progress in general modernization of society. It both enforced hats in governmental positions (sensible to me) and stressed that the Turkish society do the same (which I can see as being problematic).
-Religious garments were banned in order to unite the divided members of the Turkish society. The official reason given also includes the motive that this would keep religion strictly an internal matter of conscience.

This show you exactly the problem of kemalists elites in Turkey and why they are fundamentally in conflict with the vast majority of their own society:

Modernity could be defined as a set of universal values. Like for instance: reign of the law, freedom of thought, scientific method as a mean of civilizacional advancement...
But it doesn't have anything to with a particular alphabet or a particular way of dressing. European dresses are not more modern than turkish, african or egyptian dresses. They were invented and designated in a specific geographical space, that is western Europe.

Thinking that by wearing those cloths, Turkey will be a modern country, just consist of "aping" the western culture hoping that, magically, something will occur. It's western fetishism and not modernism.

In the same way, prohibiting all religious garment is not a secular move. It's a totalitarian move. Secularism don't state that religion should be kept lock in the personal conscience. Totalitarianism does. It's more close to what Hitler, Mao or Stalin did to any kind of dissent, political or religious, than to what secularism mean in western democracy like France or the USA. Secularism is not about inventing a monolithic national character, it's about preserving the equilibrium between social cohesiveness and liberty of belief. In the same manner, Ataturk had islam totally nationalized and have created a kind of state-clergy to modify the religion as he willed. So again, nothing to do with secularism or modernity but totalitarianism and authoritarianism, while using religion when it was usefull.

Banning all women wear hijab to superior education (like it was the case until 2011) is not a way to "unify society", it's a authoritarian move to designate who can pretend to modernity and who cannot.
It's why you have a highly divided turkey today. Because a big part of the kemalist elite spent the last 70 years spitting on everything not-in-line with kemalist line of thought. So yeah, i am glad things are changing, and you can see that the old Kemalist party is now presenting a female candidate with an hijab. The same woman they would have oppressed and excluded from the public sphere a decade from now.

And yes, Kemalism is racist as it's core and does old a racialist conception of turkishness.
Another piece, from Mustafa Akyol, a turkish liberal, about this issue and how Ataturk himself was racist and consider turks to be a superior race, as official scientific endeavour was made to prove that Turks were racially superior and went so far as showing a blue-eyed peasant in order to make that "demonstration".

And more on this matter, about the politics of ethnic/religious cleansing of the kemalists.

Childs in Turkey have to learn, to this day, this Ataturk declaration:

"However, every Turkish child still grows up memorizing Atatürk's 1927 address to the youth, which speaks of ‘the noble blood in your veins' and ‘how happy the one who says he is a Turk'."

So Turkishness is not about nationality, but about blood.

 

[blu]

I won't reply to the rest because you just showed that you didn't followed the discussion since the beginning..

Did I claim otherwise?

..and honestly i don't think there is any value in following this discussion.

The value I see is that people make claims, those raise legitimate questions, which either get reasonably answered or not. Most discussions work like that these days.

Demirtas is not ONLY hdp. I don't consider HDP to be a terrorist organization at all.

And yet you keep bringing up his picture - the picture of one of HDP leaders, at a YPG gathering. BTW, do you also have transcripts of what he said there?

I consider that every kurdish organization that are not linked with terrorists organizations or don't undertake terrorists actions to be valuable and noble organization, simple no?

Nope, not simple at all. In fact, you keep confusing me - is Demirtas nobody in HDP? If you keep bringing him up in the context of YPG (which you seem to consider equal to PKK), then how come you don't consider HDP, I quote, 'linked with terrorist organisations'? How does that logic work?

BUT he supported PKK and YPG and made political rally for them.

See?

Another picture, in case you call it fake:

I can assure you it hasn't even crossed my mind you'd post fake pictures in this thread.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

Do you even know who is the man with the mustache on the panel behind Demirtas ?
The historical leader/guru of the PKK.
Politicians are not stupid. If you are willing to speak in public in front of this kind of display, there is necessary a kind of endorsement, since you know people will associate you with this particular person for ever.
And this individual is considered in Turkey as Bin Laden in the USA.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

Erdogan was watching the attack.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2017-05-18/erdogan-watched-attack-on-protesters-in-dc



Also, when someone enters a thread by stating "I'm not defending the beating of protesters, but..." you can bet your ass they know exactly what they're intending to achieve, as evidenced by half the thread now being about an unrelated matter.

Watching, or ordered.

 

[blu]

Do you even know who is the man with the mustache on the panel behind Demirtas ?

I do. You didn't answer my question, though.

 

[Frustrated_me]

20 years ago I would have never thought I'd be on a forum discussing a topic with pictures of Apo.

What a world.

 

[Golden_Pigeon]

I do. You didn't answer my question, though.

And you keep questioning the kind of relationship PKK and YPG have ? And you keep questioning the fact that this HDP leader have, at least, sympathy for those groups ? And worst, you still asking if i consider all kurdish organization terrorists ?

 

[Funyarinpa]

This show you exactly the problem of kemalists elites in Turkey and why they are fundamentally in conflict with the vast majority of their own society:

Modernity could be defined as a set of universal values. Like for instance: reign of the law, freedom of thought, scientific method as a mean of civilizacional advancement...
But it doesn't have anything to with a particular alphabet or a particular way of dressing. European dresses are not more modern than turkish, african or egyptian dresses. They were invented and designated in a specific geographical space, that is western Europe.

Thinking that by wearing those cloths, Turkey will be a modern country, just consist of "aping" the western culture hoping that, magically, something will occur. It's western fetishism and not modernism.

In the same way, prohibiting all religious garment is not a secular move. It's a totalitarian move. Secularism don't state that religion should be kept lock in the personal conscience. Totalitarianism does. It's more close to what Hitler, Mao or Stalin did to any kind of dissent, political or religious, than to what secularism mean in western democracy like France or the USA. Secularism is not about inventing a monolithic national character, it's about preserving the equilibrium between social cohesiveness and liberty of belief. In the same manner, Ataturk had islam totally nationalized and have created a kind of state-clergy to modify the religion as he willed. So again, nothing to do with secularism or modernity but totalitarianism and authoritarianism, while using religion when it was usefull.

Banning all women wear hijab to superior education (like it was the case until 2011) is not a way to "unify society", it's a authoritarian move to designate who can pretend to modernity and who cannot.
It's why you have a highly divided turkey today. Because a big part of the kemalist elite spent the last 70 years spitting on everything not-in-line with kemalist line of thought. So yeah, i am glad things are changing, and you can see that the old Kemalist party is now presenting a female candidate with an hijab. The same woman they would have oppressed and excluded from the public sphere a decade from now.

And yes, Kemalism is racist as it's core and does old a racialist conception of turkishness.
Another piece, from Mustafa Akyol, a turkish liberal, about this issue and how Ataturk himself was racist and consider turks to be a superior race, as official scientific endeavour was made to prove that Turks were racially superior and went so far as showing a blue-eyed peasant in order to make that "demonstration".

And more on this matter, about the politics of ethnic/religious cleansing of the kemalists.

Childs in Turkey have to learn, to this day, this Ataturk declaration:

"However, every Turkish child still grows up memorizing Atatürk’s 1927 address to the youth, which speaks of ‘the noble blood in your veins’ and ‘how happy the one who says he is a Turk’."

So Turkishness is not about nationality, but about blood.

I can, actually, agree with you on the ban on religious clothing (including the hijab) and the mandation of Western clothing.

However, some of your points are nonsense.

1. Atatürk, the very person who spearheaded the establishment of secularism in the Turkish law, "nationalized Islam"? This is so self-contradictory that it isn't even funny.

2. Where, or even what is this "state-clergy" you are speaking of?

3. I really don't need to learn the Address To The Turkish Youth from you. You contradict yourself here as well- the latter quote is one of the central statements behind the attempt to create a new Turkish identity that's not about ethnicity but a sense of unity above all. Technically, the "noble blood in your veins" does not necessarily translate to "ethnically Turkish blood", either- it can simply be "the blood of one who identifies as Turkish".

4. If you are glad to see a country descend into rampant Islamism and outright dictatorship, then you are simply a spiteful asshole.

 

[blu]

And you keep questioning the kind of relationship PKK and YPG have?

Why shouldn't I? Aside from you equating them (because of pictures of Apo) I haven't heard anything sensible from you on subject.

And you keep questioning the fact that this HDP leader have, at least, sympathy for those groups?

Nope. He can have all the sympathy for those groups. I was asking you how it works in your head that you consider YGP terrorist, while HDP is a-ok, with a YGP-sympathizing leader. I'm still quite curious to hear your rationale.

And worst, you still asking if i consider all kurdish organization terrorists ?

No, I'm asking you which Turkish Kurdish organisations you consider non-terrorist. You formally said HDP, but I have my doubts about that, for reasons I expressed above.