The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


ATATURK TO BE REMEMBERED ON THE 70TH ANNIVERSARY OF HIS DEAT

Feel free to talk about anything that you want.

Postby denizaksulu » Thu Nov 13, 2008 1:02 pm

karma wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:Ok, miss 'credible evidence'. You are clutching on straws here.

Why waqs he not sought out by the Europeans for war crimes after the war ended? The others were, but were murdered by other fanatics before they could stand trial.


Deniz I am afraid you r wasting your time, you really dont have to prove anything, during 1914-1922 thousands of Turkish people were massacred too, coz it was a war !! So simple !! Why it is so hard to accept it for some people, really scary..
As for the lies and accusations about Kemal's leadership, I have only a proverb to say : '' Meyve veren agac tashlanir '' :wink:


Thank you Karma. I never heard that one. How apt. :lol:

Halen bisikleti dusunuyorum. :lol:
User avatar
denizaksulu
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 36077
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 11:04 am

Postby EPSILON » Thu Nov 13, 2008 3:05 pm

karma wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:Ok, miss 'credible evidence'. You are clutching on straws here.

Why waqs he not sought out by the Europeans for war crimes after the war ended? The others were, but were murdered by other fanatics before they could stand trial.


Deniz I am afraid you r wasting your time, you really dont have to prove anything, during 1914-1922 thousands of Turkish people were massacred too, coz it was a war !! So simple !! Why it is so hard to accept it for some people, really scary..
As for the lies and accusations about Kemal's leadership, I have only a proverb to say : '' Meyve veren agac tashlanir '' :wink:


This your main problem to be a real ceccular state. You can not realise the difference between a war cansualties and a central organized genocide.As Nation you proved this many many times.Only Turkey (Neo Turks) and Germans in war ii had this difficulty in modern history.
User avatar
EPSILON
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2851
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: ATHENS

Postby EPSILON » Thu Nov 13, 2008 3:05 pm

karma wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:Ok, miss 'credible evidence'. You are clutching on straws here.

Why waqs he not sought out by the Europeans for war crimes after the war ended? The others were, but were murdered by other fanatics before they could stand trial.


Deniz I am afraid you r wasting your time, you really dont have to prove anything, during 1914-1922 thousands of Turkish people were massacred too, coz it was a war !! So simple !! Why it is so hard to accept it for some people, really scary..
As for the lies and accusations about Kemal's leadership, I have only a proverb to say : '' Meyve veren agac tashlanir '' :wink:


This your main problem to be a real ceccular state. You can not realise the difference between a war cansualties and a central organized genocide.As Nation you proved this many many times.Only Turkey (Neo Turks) and Germans in war ii had this difficulty in modern history.
User avatar
EPSILON
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2851
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: ATHENS

Postby Oracle » Thu Nov 13, 2008 3:44 pm

EPSILON wrote:
karma wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:Ok, miss 'credible evidence'. You are clutching on straws here.

Why waqs he not sought out by the Europeans for war crimes after the war ended? The others were, but were murdered by other fanatics before they could stand trial.


Deniz I am afraid you r wasting your time, you really dont have to prove anything, during 1914-1922 thousands of Turkish people were massacred too, coz it was a war !! So simple !! Why it is so hard to accept it for some people, really scary..
As for the lies and accusations about Kemal's leadership, I have only a proverb to say : '' Meyve veren agac tashlanir '' :wink:


This your main problem to be a real ceccular state. You can not realise the difference between a war cansualties and a central organized genocide.As Nation you proved this many many times.Only Turkey (Neo Turks) and Germans in war ii had this difficulty in modern history.


Good point EPSILON.

The Turks send out their people to kill and destroy others, then when they suffer some casualties they call it a massacre, whilst all the time denying the millions of children, women and elderly they have slaughtered to clear the way for their expansion.
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby denizaksulu » Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:12 pm

Oracle wrote:
EPSILON wrote:
karma wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:Ok, miss 'credible evidence'. You are clutching on straws here.

Why waqs he not sought out by the Europeans for war crimes after the war ended? The others were, but were murdered by other fanatics before they could stand trial.


Deniz I am afraid you r wasting your time, you really dont have to prove anything, during 1914-1922 thousands of Turkish people were massacred too, coz it was a war !! So simple !! Why it is so hard to accept it for some people, really scary..
As for the lies and accusations about Kemal's leadership, I have only a proverb to say : '' Meyve veren agac tashlanir '' :wink:


This your main problem to be a real ceccular state. You can not realise the difference between a war cansualties and a central organized genocide.As Nation you proved this many many times.Only Turkey (Neo Turks) and Germans in war ii had this difficulty in modern history.


Good point EPSILON.

The Turks send out their people to kill and destroy others, then when they suffer some casualties they call it a massacre, whilst all the time denying the millions of children, women and elderly they have slaughtered to clear the way for their expansion.



Oracle, what expansion are you talking about. Cyprus, 1974? That was wrong and I condemn it. 1904 1919? They were defending their already existing borders. In Paradise Lost, did you skip the pages including the massacres commited by the Greek army against the Tirkish population,after their defeat by the Kemalist forces ant retreat? And yes the same book does mention the unruly Chettes' (brigands to you) behaiviour in Izmir. Did you ask yourself why? That is the very reason why I am against anymore bloodshed on our beautiful island, which is our home. Violence begets violence.
User avatar
denizaksulu
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 36077
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 11:04 am

Re: ATATURK TO BE REMEMBERED ON THE 70TH ANNIVERSARY OF HIS

Postby Kikapu » Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:02 pm

halil wrote:Remembrance ceremonies will be held across the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus tomorrow alongside Turkey to mark the 70th anniversary of the death of Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey.

Flags across the country will be flown half mast from 09.05, the exact time of Ataturk’s death until sunset.

The first ceremony in Lefkosa will take place in front of the Ataturk Monument, where wreaths were laid, a minute’s silence will be observed and the flags pulled down to half-mast in memory of the late Turkish Leader.

A special remembrance ceremony will also be held at the Ataturk Cultural Center as 9.30 am.

Ceremonies will also be held in schools and cultural centers in Lefkosa and across the TRNC.

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk emerged as a military hero at the Dardanells in 1915 and became the leader of the Turkish national liberation struggle in 1919.

Following a series of impressive victories against the western invaders of his country, he led the Turkish Nation to full independence by establishing the Republic of Turkey in 1923 with a new government truly representing the nation’s will.

As the founding President for 15 years, until his death in 1938, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk introduced a broad range of swift and sweeping reforms in many fields, forming the basis of today’s Modern Turkey.

Image


ISTANBUL JOURNAL
Published: November 13, 2008

Turkey's hero, behind the bronze veneer

By Sabrina Tavernise

ISTANBUL: After nearly a century of looking serious, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey, has started to smile.

Ataturk — a war-hero-turned-statesman who defended Turkey during the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire — is the subject of what is perhaps the world's longest personality cult.

His portrait hangs in every tea shop, government office and classroom. Insulting his memory is a crime under Turkish law. And every Nov. 10, Turkey observes a moment of silence to commemorate his death in 1938.

But the ironclad official version might be softening. Last month a documentary on Ataturk was released that looks at his human side. That might not sound like much, but in a country where official history is kept under lock and key, the film, "Mustafa," was a brave endeavor.

The film is by no means an effort to tear the leader down. It is a largely sympathetic portrayal. But the mere fact that its director, Can Dundar, was able to show Ataturk looking less like a bronze statue and more like a man with a bad drinking habit who sometimes got bored, says a lot about how far Turkey has come in the past 10 years.

"Can Dundar opened the gates of an ivory cage that we have locked ourselves in," Mehmet Ali Birand, a journalist, wrote in the daily newspaper Posta.

Founded in 1923, modern Turkey in its early years was monochromatic, as authorities scrubbed the country of differences to forge a national identity. But as wealth and democracy have increased, so have efforts to re-evaluate the past, bringing some of those differences, ethnic and religious, into focus.

Turkish intellectuals like Dundar have begun to question the official line, opening up painful debates on topics that have long been considered closed. Ataturk, whose name means father of the Turks, was one of the most important figures of the 20th century, but his story is not broadly known in the West, in part because his godlike status in Turkey has made it too politically prickly to tell.

Previous attempts to tell it on film have failed. In an article last year titled "The 56-Year Story of the Unmade Ataturk Film," an English-language newspaper, The Turkish Daily News, said, "Actors have grown old waiting for the role," citing reported efforts by Antonio Banderas, Kevin Costner and Yul Brynner.

"Turkey would never want to see its founding father, which it sees as a holy person, be portrayed as a person with human weaknesses," the paper said.

That trait is at the heart of many of this country's problems. Turkey has a tremendous capacity for denial, which includes the Armenian genocide early in the last century and a large Kurdish minority whose existence the state is only beginning to acknowledge. Without facing that history, intellectuals here argue, Turkey will never be able to move beyond it.

"Ataturk is used as a shield by those who are blocking discussions on many deformities in this country," wrote Ahmet Altan, one of the country's most prominent intellectuals and a columnist for Taraf, a liberal daily newspaper. "They attribute godlike status to Ataturk and then hide behind it."

Dundar drew on a wide selection of Ataturk's diaries and letters that had been closed in military archives for decades. The man who emerges in the film is even more radical in his beliefs than Turks have been taught, Dundar said.

Ataturk was determined, for example, to subordinate Islam and to force Turks to look and behave as Westerners. In 1914, Dundar said, the 33-year-old Ataturk attended a ball in the Czech spa of Carlsbad with a Turkish diplomat and his wife, who remarked that she could not imagine such a scene — the dancing, the dress — in her home country.

In a later entry in his diaries, Ataturk wrote that "it would not be difficult at all," Dundar said. "If I would be given the power, I would do it overnight," Ataturk wrote.

"Ataturk didn't believe it should happen over time," Dundar said. "He thought it should be abrupt."

Dundar said he could use only a small fraction of the material he sifted through that revealed something about Ataturk's thoughts on Islam. The rest was too explosive, he said.

There were a few sharp divergences from the official history, though the film veered close. In one scene, Ataturk says, just before an address to an early Parliament, that he believes the areas populated predominantly by Kurds should have a special status. The concept is extremely controversial in Turkey, which fears that its largely Kurdish southeast will want to secede, and discussions of special status for the region are strictly taboo.

The film, which opened on Oct. 29, National Day, and is being shown in more than 200 theaters around Turkey, was praised by intellectuals but drew a frenzy of angry reactions. ( Dundar, knowing the delicacy of the topic, preferred to speak in his native Turkish for the interview for maximum precision of language, though his English is fluent.)

"Your production is a priceless source for people who want to tarnish young minds with their dark thoughts," wrote a viewer on the movie's Web site who identified himself as Tulay. "Surely, you would also qualify for a Nobel Prize," he wrote in a reference to the Nobel Prize-winning Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk, who was spurned by the Turkish establishment after discussing the Armenian genocide.

"I denounce you."

Nevertheless, the kinder, gentler Ataturk seems to be a turning point of some sort for Turkey. Even the Turkish state seems to feel the need for some adjustments: New bank notes planned for circulation in 2009 picture the leader smiling, not scowling.

Sebnem Arsu contributed reporting.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/13/ ... taturk.php
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 18050
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Postby Oracle » Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:02 pm

Turkey and Secularism: Myth or Reality?

Posted on October 27, 2008
By Lee J Walker

The nation of Turkey is often praised for being a secular role model for other Islamic societies. It is claimed that the land of Turkey is a beacon of hope and that democracy and secularism can exist within a mainly Muslim nation state. But is this based on reality?

If we concentrate on the founding father of modern day Turkey, Ataturk, then it is clear that he himself supported the destruction of Christianity via the Assyrian, Armenian and Greek Christian genocide of 1915. Turkish nationalism was the potent force behind modern day Turkey and secularism is tainted by its anti-Christian nature, and also by its anti-Kurdish nature. Turkey was founded on Turkish nationalism and secularism and it did not protect the Christians of or give them equal rights.

Despite this the myth of modernity and secularism remains and Western nations stick to this mantra. Yes, Ataturk faced many difficulties and from a Turkish point of view he was very astute because he preserved a Turkish state when it was threatened by others. Yet in order to do this he crushed millions of Christians via massacres, starvation, and by destroying countless numbers of Christian villages and communities.

Ataturk did implement many reforms in order to modernize Turkey and he did lay the foundation for a secular state. In this sense he crushed thoughts of a Sharia Islamic state and he gave more rights to females. But his legacy of modernity and secularism is tainted by the events of history and by overt nationalism. Therefore, we must never forget the Assyrian, Greek and Armenian genocide of 1915 and the continuing legacy of anti-Christian forces in modern day Turkey.

So if secularism means having the right to crush Christian minorities, moderate Muslim minorities like the Alevi, and ethnic minorities like the Assyrians Armenians, and Kurds, in modern day Turkey, then it is not the secularism which I support. Turkish secularism is tainted by this overt nationalism and the Sunni orthodox mindset means that religious inequality is the norm.

The rights of Christians and the Alevi Muslims are not equal in today’s Turkey. In recent times many Christians have been murdered. For the more numerous Alevi Muslims, it is clear that they face huge discrimination. Secular Turkey is a myth because under the surface we find a different Turkey based on preserving the dominance of orthodox Sunni Islam.

So why do democrats and secularists praise Turkey for being a shining example and evidence that democracy and Islam can work together? Turkey favors Islam over any other religion and religious equality does not exist. On the contrary, modern day Turkey supports Sunni orthodox Islam and persecution of minorities is endemic. Given this, Islam still controls society and Christians and other minorities face harsh times.

It is apparent that many Western democrats and secularists are ignoring the reality of Turkey. Turkey is tainted by Sunni Islamic thought, which are based on mass discrimination. If Turkey is secular and moderate, what does this say about the rest of the Islamic world and equality?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lee Jay Walker serves as Tokyo Corrsepondent of The Seoul Times. He specializes in international relations and geopolitics. He is also involved in analyst work and research on business. After finishing BA degree in East European Studies at the University of London, He earned MA degree in Asia Pacific Studies in Nottingham Trent University. He also studied business at London Institute.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby humanist » Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:26 pm

ATATURK TO BE REMEMBERED ON THE 70TH ANNIVERSARY OF HIS DEAT


Good for him ........ but what I saw when I was last in the occupied territory of Cyprus is hard to forget him with all those statutes of him everywhere ........ well I guess it keeps the trnc infrastructure alive and people in employment.
User avatar
humanist
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 6585
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 11:46 am

Postby Tim Drayton » Sat Dec 20, 2008 11:54 am

Tim Drayton wrote:Two Turkish academics have lodged a complaint with the public prosecutor against the director of a recent film chronicling Ataturk's life on the grounds that the film depicts the latter as a chain smoker and heavy drinker, and this is an incorrect role model for Turkish youth.

http://www.radikal.com.tr/Default.aspx? ... egoryID=77


It seems that Can Dündar, the producer of this film, has been required to submit a statement to the public prosecutor in connection with three complaints submitted to the public prosecution service about this film.
User avatar
Tim Drayton
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8799
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:32 am
Location: Limassol/Lemesos

Previous

Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest