Cyprus-Forum.com

[Tim Drayton]

All of the early Kurdish revolts were based on religous motives...

All of them ? Kurds did not have a problem with the state suppression of their Kurdishness ? Where did you get this information ? From the same regime who betrayed the Kurds ? The same regime that created the "mountain Turk" lie ? Don't you think this source is biased just a little ? Isn't it fairer to say the Kurdish revolts were based on opposing a betrayal ? Saying "religious motives" make the Kurds look like nutters and hides the real villain of the piece.

The rediculous "mountain Turk" discourse was the creation of Kenan Evren's fascist junta that came to power in a CIA-sponsored coup in 1980 so is hardly relevant to a discussion of events during the early years of the Republic of Turkey.

[insan]

All of the early Kurdish revolts were based on religous motives...

All of them ? Kurds did not have a problem with the state suppression of their Kurdishness ? Where did you get this information ? From the same regime who betrayed the Kurds ? The same regime that created the "mountain Turk" lie ? Don't you think this source is biased just a little ? Isn't it fairer to say the Kurdish revolts were based on opposing a betrayal ? Saying "religious motives" make the Kurds look like nutters and hides the real villain of the piece.

The rediculous "mountain Turk" discourse was the creation of Kenan Evren's fascist junta that came to power in a CIA-sponsored coup in 1980 so is hardly relevant to a discussion of events during the early years of the Republic of Turkey.

During the 1930s and 1940s, the government had disguised the presence of the Kurds statistically by categorizing them as "Mountain Turks." With official encouragement, some scholars even suggested that Kurdish, an Indo-European language closely related to Persian, was a dialect of Turkish. By the 1980s, the Mountain Turks' label had been dropped in favor of a new euphemism for Kurds: "Eastern Turks" (dogulu ).

http://countrystudies.us/turkey/26.htm

[Tim Drayton]

All of the early Kurdish revolts were based on religous motives...

All of them ? Kurds did not have a problem with the state suppression of their Kurdishness ? Where did you get this information ? From the same regime who betrayed the Kurds ? The same regime that created the "mountain Turk" lie ? Don't you think this source is biased just a little ? Isn't it fairer to say the Kurdish revolts were based on opposing a betrayal ? Saying "religious motives" make the Kurds look like nutters and hides the real villain of the piece.

The rediculous "mountain Turk" discourse was the creation of Kenan Evren's fascist junta that came to power in a CIA-sponsored coup in 1980 so is hardly relevant to a discussion of events during the early years of the Republic of Turkey.

During the 1930s and 1940s, the government had disguised the presence of the Kurds statistically by categorizing them as "Mountain Turks." With official encouragement, some scholars even suggested that Kurdish, an Indo-European language closely related to Persian, was a dialect of Turkish. By the 1980s, the Mountain Turks' label had been dropped in favor of a new euphemism for Kurds: "Eastern Turks" (dogulu ).

http://countrystudies.us/turkey/26.htm

Thanks. I stand corrected. I think it is fair to say that you did not hear this description much in 1960's and 1970's Turkey; perhaps it is fairer to say that the 12 September 1980 junta revived this discourse from the dustbin of history where it belonged.

[insan]

All of the early Kurdish revolts were based on religous motives...

All of them ? Kurds did not have a problem with the state suppression of their Kurdishness ? Where did you get this information ? From the same regime who betrayed the Kurds ? The same regime that created the "mountain Turk" lie ? Don't you think this source is biased just a little ? Isn't it fairer to say the Kurdish revolts were based on opposing a betrayal ? Saying "religious motives" make the Kurds look like nutters and hides the real villain of the piece.

The rediculous "mountain Turk" discourse was the creation of Kenan Evren's fascist junta that came to power in a CIA-sponsored coup in 1980 so is hardly relevant to a discussion of events during the early years of the Republic of Turkey.

During the 1930s and 1940s, the government had disguised the presence of the Kurds statistically by categorizing them as "Mountain Turks." With official encouragement, some scholars even suggested that Kurdish, an Indo-European language closely related to Persian, was a dialect of Turkish. By the 1980s, the Mountain Turks' label had been dropped in favor of a new euphemism for Kurds: "Eastern Turks" (dogulu ).

http://countrystudies.us/turkey/26.htm

Thanks. I stand corrected. I think it is fair to say that you did not hear this description much in 1960's and 1970's Turkey; perhaps it is fairer to say that the 12 September 1980 junta revived this discourse from the dustbin of history where it belonged.

Tim, how much "mountain Turks" were Kurds, that much Selanik Turks that Ataturk was one of them, were Turk... All inhabitants of Turkey speaking any dialect of Turkic were considered as Turkish.

In this context, Ataturk and his friends tried to create a new nation by removing all foreign influences in language and culture of people of Turkey with a nation building process. This was required for unity of it's people...

However they failed to integrate a considerable amount of Kurdic community into this newly created Turkic nation because of various reasons; i.e, weak economy, inadequate interest in developing eastern regions of Turkey, ill-intentioned provocations of regions people by foreigners etc..

Still it is not very clear cut issue the Turkicness, Kurdicness and Arabicness, hybrid ethno-linguistic groups of the people who inhabits the so-called Kurdish regions of Turkey.

As for "fascist junta" definition of urs on temporary military regime of 1980-1983 era; what type of fascist philosopy the regime was bearing which convicted too many national fascists besides extreme leftists?

The only condemnable aspect of the 1980 coup is their inhumane methods of interrogation of arrested suspects, trial process and very heavy sentences the martial courts charged those people...

[Tim Drayton]

[...]

As for "fascist junta" definition of urs on temporary military regime of 1980-1983 era; what type of fascist philosopy the regime was bearing which convicted too many national fascists besides extreme leftists?

The only condemnable aspect of the 1980 coup is their inhumane methods of interrogation of arrested suspects, trial process and very heavy sentences the martial courts charged those people...

I personally know several people who were detained following the coup and their accounts of their personal experiences in detention, which I do not wish to dwell on, provide me with a lot of justification for describing these people as 'fascists'.

Want some more? What about:

- The suspension of the rule of law and its replacement with a parody of a military-run judicial system in which, for example, the conviction by a civilian court of the murderer of public prosecutor Doğan Öz, which was obviously a politically motivated killing because he had started to uncover the workings of the 'deep state', was overturned by a military court even though the murderer CONFESSED to this act in the civilian court.

- The fact that newspapers for most of the 1980's were forbidden to even use the word 'Kurdish'.

- The suspension of the liberal 1961 constitution and its replacement with a far more restrictive new constitution.

- The ending of academic freedom. Initially, huge numbers of academice were turfed out of their jobs following the coup. Universities were placed under the strict control of YÖK (Higher Education Council), a body whose purpose was to bring the univesrities tightly under state control, to an extent that is unacceptable in any democratic country.

- The attempt to prevent all politicians who had held office prior to 1980 from ever participating in politics again - i.e. the overnight disqualification of the country's entire political class. This was rejected in the referendum of I think 1988, the first serious defeat suffered by the junta.

- The creation of the 'National Security Council' a body dominated by the military with significant powers to dictate policy to the democratically elected government.

The above are a few examples of what this junta did. In my view, they cost Turkey about 20 years in terms of development.

[insan]

[...]

As for "fascist junta" definition of urs on temporary military regime of 1980-1983 era; what type of fascist philosopy the regime was bearing which convicted too many national fascists besides extreme leftists?

The only condemnable aspect of the 1980 coup is their inhumane methods of interrogation of arrested suspects, trial process and very heavy sentences the martial courts charged those people...

I personally know several people who were detained following the coup and their accounts of their personal experiences in detention, which I do not wish to dwell on, provide me with a lot of justification for describing these people as 'fascists'.

Want some more? What about:

- The suspension of the rule of law and its replacement with a parody of a military-run judicial system in which, for example, the conviction by a civilian court of the murderer of public prosecutor Doğan Öz, which was obviously a politically motivated killing because he had started to uncover the workings of the 'deep state', was overturned by a military court even though the murderer CONFESSED to this act in the civilian court.

- The fact that newspapers for most of the 1980's were forbidden to even use the word 'Kurdish'.

- The suspension of the liberal 1961 constitution and its replacement with a far more restrictive new constitution.

- The ending of academic freedom. Initially, huge numbers of academice were turfed out of their jobs following the coup. Universities were placed under the strict control of YÖK (Higher Education Council), a body whose purpose was to bring the univesrities tightly under state control, to an extent that is unacceptable in any democratic country.

- The attempt to prevent all politicians who had held office prior to 1980 from ever participating in politics again - i.e. the overnight disqualification of the country's entire political class. This was rejected in the referendum of I think 1988, the first serious defeat suffered by the junta.

- The creation of the 'National Security Council' a body dominated by the military with significant powers to dictate policy to the democratically elected government.

The above are a few examples of what this junta did. In my view, they cost Turkey about 20 years in terms of development.

What u say above confirms what I said in my previous post:"The only condemnable aspect of the 1980 coup is their inhumane methods of interrogation of arrested suspects, trial process and very heavy sentences the martial courts charged those people..."

I'd wish then the "democratic" civil regime sort all these problems out peacefully but their methods of struggling were not peaceful and any better than the military regime of 80s.... after all, be it leftist, rightist or high ranked officials of Turkish army all constitute the people of Turkey. People of a country that were undermined both internally and externally for many decades bcz of various reasons...

In it's essentials, the primary force which prevented Turkey to adequately develop is the external factors(the interests of Western and Eastern blocks)...

I couldn't expect any better from the people of a country under such very difficult circumstances... after the collapse of Soviet Union, things began getting better in Turkey bcz one of the external factors undermining the development of Turkey had been weakened to a great extent...

[Tim Drayton]

If we examine the text of the decision of the No. 1 Ankara Military Court to acquit self-confessed murderer (in a murder which was clearly politically motivated) İbrahim Çiftçi (in the original and in translation):

Sanık İbrahim Çiftçi'nin maktul Doğan Öz'ü taammüden öldürdüğü mahkemizce sabit görülmüş, ancak Askeri Yargıtay Dairler Kurulu kararı mehkememizi bağlayıcı nitelikte bulunuğundan sanık İbrahim Çiftçi hakkındaki 7/8 oyçokluğunda dayanan bozma ilamina uyularak, sırf bu hukuki zorunluk nedeniyle sanık İbrahim Çiftçi'nin beraatına karar verilmiştir.

It has been determined by our court that the accused İbrahim Çiftçi intentionally murdered the deceased Doğan Öz; however, since the Military Court of Cassation Chambers Council ruling is binding on our court and in accordance with the judgment to acquit by a majority of 7/8 with respect to the accused İbrahim Çiftçi, a decision has been rendered, solely due to this legal obligation, to acquit the accused İbrahim Çiftçi.

surely this alone suggests that not all was well under the military regime which took over by brute force on 12 September 1980. Can any jurisdiction in the world where a self-confessed killer can be acquited (not pardoned) by a military court which is under the direct control of a military junta be taken seriously?

[insan]

If we examine the text of the decision of the No. 1 Ankara Military Court to acquit self-confessed murderer (in a murder which was clearly politically motivated) İbrahim Çiftçi (in the original and in translation):

Sanık İbrahim Çiftçi'nin maktul Doğan Öz'ü taammüden öldürdüğü mahkemizce sabit görülmüş, ancak Askeri Yargıtay Dairler Kurulu kararı mehkememizi bağlayıcı nitelikte bulunuğundan sanık İbrahim Çiftçi hakkındaki 7/8 oyçokluğunda dayanan bozma ilamina uyularak, sırf bu hukuki zorunluk nedeniyle sanık İbrahim Çiftçi'nin beraatına karar verilmiştir.

It has been determined by our court that the accused İbrahim Çiftçi intentionally murdered the deceased Doğan Öz; however, since the Military Court of Cassation Chambers Council ruling is binding on our court and in accordance with the judgment to acquit by a majority of 7/8 with respect to the accused İbrahim Çiftçi, a decision has been rendered, solely due to this legal obligation, to acquit the accused İbrahim Çiftçi.

surely this alone suggests that not all was well under the military regime which took over by brute force on 12 September 1980. Can any jurisdiction in the world where a self-confessed killer can be acquited (not pardoned) by a military court which is under the direct control of a military junta be taken seriously?

It was the martial courts that convicted Çiftçi with a death sentence for 4 times. So many ultra-nationalists were sentenced to death and very long imprisonment. It seems there wasn't any discrimination towards left wing and right wing criminals.

Even in the court of military appeals, the acquittal of Çiftçi voted 8 in favour and 7 against. If all junta judges were part of deep state, why did 7 military judges voted against the acquittal of Çiftçi? How can this be interpreted? Had Çiftçi a "special" place in "deep state" of then Turkey and majority of the judges were under influence of "deep state"?

In my opinion, criminal is criminal and must be fairly tried, interrogated then charged according to laws... All concerned parties made mistakes in then Turkey... and all these mistakes, essentially can only be explained in correlation of then the circumstances of Turkey...

[Tim Drayton]

If we examine the text of the decision of the No. 1 Ankara Military Court to acquit self-confessed murderer (in a murder which was clearly politically motivated) İbrahim Çiftçi (in the original and in translation):

Sanık İbrahim Çiftçi'nin maktul Doğan Öz'ü taammüden öldürdüğü mahkemizce sabit görülmüş, ancak Askeri Yargıtay Dairler Kurulu kararı mehkememizi bağlayıcı nitelikte bulunuğundan sanık İbrahim Çiftçi hakkındaki 7/8 oyçokluğunda dayanan bozma ilamina uyularak, sırf bu hukuki zorunluk nedeniyle sanık İbrahim Çiftçi'nin beraatına karar verilmiştir.

It has been determined by our court that the accused İbrahim Çiftçi intentionally murdered the deceased Doğan Öz; however, since the Military Court of Cassation Chambers Council ruling is binding on our court and in accordance with the judgment to acquit by a majority of 7/8 with respect to the accused İbrahim Çiftçi, a decision has been rendered, solely due to this legal obligation, to acquit the accused İbrahim Çiftçi.

surely this alone suggests that not all was well under the military regime which took over by brute force on 12 September 1980. Can any jurisdiction in the world where a self-confessed killer can be acquited (not pardoned) by a military court which is under the direct control of a military junta be taken seriously?

It was the martial courts that convicted Çiftçi with a death sentence for 4 times. So many ultra-nationalists were sentenced to death and very long imprisonment. It seems there wasn't any discrimination towards left wing and right wing criminals.

Even in the court of military appeals, the acquittal of Çiftçi voted 8 in favour and 7 against. If all junta judges were part of deep state, why did 7 military judges voted against the acquittal of Çiftçi? How can this be interpreted? Had Çiftçi a "special" place in "deep state" of then Turkey and majority of the judges were under influence of "deep state"?

In my opinion, criminal is criminal and must be fairly tried, interrogated then charged according to laws... All concerned parties made mistakes in then Turkey... and all these mistakes, essentially can only be explained in correlation of then the circumstances of Turkey...

There was an article recently in the Radikal newspaper about a school somewhere in Turkey that changed its name from 'Kenan Evren Secondary School' or some such name, and pointing out that almost all streets, schools etc. in Turkey that once bore the name 'Kenan Evren' have now been changed. The truth is that the name Kenan Evren nowadays stinks to high heaven in Turkey. I have no doubt why.

If you cannot see anything wrong in an appeal court controlled by this junta overturning the conviction of a SELF-CONFESSED murderer for blatantly political reasons then there is no hope for you.

[insan]

If we examine the text of the decision of the No. 1 Ankara Military Court to acquit self-confessed murderer (in a murder which was clearly politically motivated) İbrahim Çiftçi (in the original and in translation):

Sanık İbrahim Çiftçi'nin maktul Doğan Öz'ü taammüden öldürdüğü mahkemizce sabit görülmüş, ancak Askeri Yargıtay Dairler Kurulu kararı mehkememizi bağlayıcı nitelikte bulunuğundan sanık İbrahim Çiftçi hakkındaki 7/8 oyçokluğunda dayanan bozma ilamina uyularak, sırf bu hukuki zorunluk nedeniyle sanık İbrahim Çiftçi'nin beraatına karar verilmiştir.

It has been determined by our court that the accused İbrahim Çiftçi intentionally murdered the deceased Doğan Öz; however, since the Military Court of Cassation Chambers Council ruling is binding on our court and in accordance with the judgment to acquit by a majority of 7/8 with respect to the accused İbrahim Çiftçi, a decision has been rendered, solely due to this legal obligation, to acquit the accused İbrahim Çiftçi.

surely this alone suggests that not all was well under the military regime which took over by brute force on 12 September 1980. Can any jurisdiction in the world where a self-confessed killer can be acquited (not pardoned) by a military court which is under the direct control of a military junta be taken seriously?

It was the martial courts that convicted Çiftçi with a death sentence for 4 times. So many ultra-nationalists were sentenced to death and very long imprisonment. It seems there wasn't any discrimination towards left wing and right wing criminals.

Even in the court of military appeals, the acquittal of Çiftçi voted 8 in favour and 7 against. If all junta judges were part of deep state, why did 7 military judges voted against the acquittal of Çiftçi? How can this be interpreted? Had Çiftçi a "special" place in "deep state" of then Turkey and majority of the judges were under influence of "deep state"?

In my opinion, criminal is criminal and must be fairly tried, interrogated then charged according to laws... All concerned parties made mistakes in then Turkey... and all these mistakes, essentially can only be explained in correlation of then the circumstances of Turkey...

There was an article recently in the Radikal newspaper about a school somewhere in Turkey that changed its name from 'Kenan Evren Secondary School' or some such name, and pointing out that almost all streets, schools etc. in Turkey that once bore the name 'Kenan Evren' have now been changed. The truth is that the name Kenan Evren nowadays stinks to high heaven in Turkey. I have no doubt why.

If you cannot see anything wrong in an appeal court controlled by this junta overturning the conviction of a SELF-CONFESSED murderer for blatantly political reasons then there is no hope for you.

Did I say it wasn't wrong? I only emphasized that the matters r not as simple as how u r trying to portray in ur simplified posts... U don't take into account the then circumstances which shaped the course of actions. The issue is too complicated and there had been some significant positive impacts of 1980 coup too. The fact is that the average people of Turkey that were not active on extreme poles of ideologic civil war embraced the military intervention of Turkish army...

The decision to change the street,school names etc bearing the name of Kenan Evren was taken in some cities which left wing CHP and nationalist MHP were very strong... it's a very natural reaction from those political groups because they have always mercilessly critisized the coup of 1980 and then the Orgeneral Kenan Evren.