The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Kemal Ataturk secret jew

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Postby Kifeas » Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:48 pm

denizaksulu wrote:
Kifeas wrote:Whether Kemal was a Jew and /or a gay and /or a freemason and /or a drunkard and /or womanizer, etc, or none of them at all; is absolutely totally irrelevant, as it was his personal issues and life! What is important today is to recognize the fact that he was a dictator; but even more important is to recognize and accept the fact that Turkey’s currently practiced ruling ideology -the one bearing his name, is a totalitarian, nationalistic, militaristic and a largely anachronistic one! It bears most of the ingredients and boarders that of fascism itself!

http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/ ... t_23_2.htm



What you give with one hand you take with the other. I am not going to argue as to your definition of a 'dictato' , whats the point arguing with a GC on the subject. What matters is what he achieved for the Turkish people and how much he was loved by a vast majority of the Turkish people.
It is sad that YOU have to categorise people and malign them.

MK must have been the most popular'dictator' who has ever lived.

The people needed such a strong hand to redirect them to 'betterment'.


I am only giving back what belongs to somebody, and I am taking away what it doesn’t! Kemal may have been other things too, such as a hero for the Turkish people, a great military leader and a bright statesman, but he was also a dictator by default and by definition! A dictator is simply someone that dictates from top down his own decisions, ideas and views on matters, without these been taken in a dialectical, consensual and democratic way and process! I personally have no issues with Ataturk himself, his life and his whatever real or imaginary achievements for benefit of the Turkish people.

What I have issues with, is the ideology bearing his name, i.e. kemalism! And this, not so much because it is the ruling /governing ideology of the Turkish state and society, but more so because it is an ideology the TC community subscribes too, and which it aims to institutionally transplant and incorporate in Cyprus, even in the case of a future solution of the Cyprus problem! We already have evidence to this, if one reads the proposed constitution of one of the two states in federal Cyprus, that of the TC "constituent" state, as it was envisioned by Kofi Anan and his associates in their proposed and failed plan!

Kemalism is a totalitarian, non-pluralistic, mono-cultural and nationalistic ideology that is not suitable even for Turkey –said aside for Cyprus! It is an ideology centered on Turkishness and allegiance to the Turkish nation, flag and state, and it is quite indigestible and crossly intolerable the fact that the TC community wants to incorporate it into Cypriot affairs, instead of an ideology promoting allegiance to the Cypriot federal nation-state! If the aim of a solution is reunification, then how can this be achieved if the TC community will be identified with and swear alignment and allegiance to mainland Turkey, politically and legally a foreign nation-state? This hostile provocation on the part of the TC community against the GC one, takes greater dimensions if one considers that the TC “constituent” state of the Anan plan was meant to be a part of Cyprus in which GCs do have the inherent right and would have returned to settled in it as permanent residents! The TC community has absolutely no right to impose –set aside institutionally- its own cultural identity and Turkey’s nationalist ideology onto the GCs, into their own country!

In that respect, I do have every right to speak about kemalism, and to point out its shortcomings and the fact that it is completely and grossly unsuitable for Cyprus! I do however respect the TC’s right to honor and celebrate Kemal Ataturk as a national hero of themselves; to the extent they consider themselves as Turks, even in a cultural sense! What they have no right is to use state mechanisms to institutionally impose his ideology, in a multicultural Cyprus -a separate and different nation-state to that of Turkey!
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby denizaksulu » Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:08 pm

Kifeas wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:
Kifeas wrote:Whether Kemal was a Jew and /or a gay and /or a freemason and /or a drunkard and /or womanizer, etc, or none of them at all; is absolutely totally irrelevant, as it was his personal issues and life! What is important today is to recognize the fact that he was a dictator; but even more important is to recognize and accept the fact that Turkey’s currently practiced ruling ideology -the one bearing his name, is a totalitarian, nationalistic, militaristic and a largely anachronistic one! It bears most of the ingredients and boarders that of fascism itself!

http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/ ... t_23_2.htm



What you give with one hand you take with the other. I am not going to argue as to your definition of a 'dictato' , whats the point arguing with a GC on the subject. What matters is what he achieved for the Turkish people and how much he was loved by a vast majority of the Turkish people.
It is sad that YOU have to categorise people and malign them.

MK must have been the most popular'dictator' who has ever lived.

The people needed such a strong hand to redirect them to 'betterment'.


I am only giving back what belongs to somebody, and I am taking away what it doesn’t! Kemal may have been other things too, such as a hero for the Turkish people, a great military leader and a bright statesman, but he was also a dictator by default and by definition! A dictator is simply someone that dictates from top down his own decisions, ideas and views on matters, without these been taken in a dialectical, consensual and democratic way and process! I personally have no issues with Ataturk himself, his life and his whatever real or imaginary achievements for benefit of the Turkish people.

What I have issues with, is the ideology bearing his name, i.e. kemalism! And this, not so much because it is the ruling /governing ideology of the Turkish state and society, but more so because it is an ideology the TC community subscribes too, and which it aims to institutionally transplant and incorporate in Cyprus, even in the case of a future solution of the Cyprus problem! We already have evidence to this, if one reads the proposed constitution of one of the two states in federal Cyprus, that of the TC "constituent" state, as it was envisioned by Kofi Anan and his associates in their proposed and failed plan!

Kemalism is a totalitarian, non-pluralistic, mono-cultural and nationalistic ideology that is not suitable even for Turkey –said aside for Cyprus! It is an ideology centered on Turkishness and allegiance to the Turkish nation, flag and state, and it is quite indigestible and crossly intolerable the fact that the TC community wants to incorporate it into Cypriot affairs, instead of an ideology promoting allegiance to the Cypriot federal nation-state! If the aim of a solution is reunification, then how can this be achieved if the TC community will be identified with and swear alignment and allegiance to mainland Turkey, politically and legally a foreign nation-state? This hostile provocation on the part of the TC community against the GC one, takes greater dimensions if one considers that the TC “constituent” state of the Anan plan was meant to be a part of Cyprus in which GCs do have the inherent right and would have returned to settled in it as permanent residents! The TC community has absolutely no right to impose –set aside institutionally- its own cultural identity and Turkey’s nationalist ideology onto the GCs, into their own country!

In that respect, I do have every right to speak about kemalism, and to point out its shortcomings and the fact that it is completely and grossly unsuitable for Cyprus! I do however respect the TC’s right to honor and celebrate Kemal Ataturk as a national hero of themselves; to the extent they consider themselves as Turks, even in a cultural sense! What they have no right is to use state mechanisms to institutionally impose his ideology, in a multicultural Cyprus -a separate and different nation-state to that of Turkey!



Thanks for your lengthy response Kifeas. I am against the malignment of this great man. Modern day politics, Kemalism, Kemalist Ideology,Fascism do not interest me. Basically I hate politics. The association Of Mustafa Kemals name with any type of modern politics is anathema to me. Personally I see him as a hero of his people and so do many others (at least those who have not been at the receiving end of his bayonets).
User avatar
denizaksulu
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 36077
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 11:04 am

Postby BC Numismatics » Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:14 pm

denizaksulu wrote:
BC Numismatics wrote:Deniz,Ataturk was very authoritarian,but Pakistan's founder,Quaid-i-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah (who was the first Governor-General of the Dominion of Pakistan from Independence in August 1947 until his death in late 1948) is remembered as a national hero.Interestingly,Jinnah's descendants live in India.

Here's a link; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Ali_Jinnah .

Aidan.



Aidan, What many people do not understand is the effect of islam on the Turkish people at the time. What they needed was what you call an 'authoritarian' hand to wake them up from there deep ISLAM INDUCED SLUMBER.
MKemal is not only a great Military hero for his people but also a great leader as well. Outsiders would never understand that and only go by dictionary definitions.
I wish somebody would read what Ernest Hemingway wrote of the Great man. and I am not talking of the Snows of the Kilimanjaro.


Deniz,I know about Ataturk's achievements,but I reckon that Mohammad Ali Jinnah did a lot in the area of fighting for both the independence of India & the independence of Pakistan.Unlike Ataturk,Jinnah achieved his goal by non-violent means,as did Mahatma Gandhi.

Aidan.
User avatar
BC Numismatics
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Wellington,New Zealand.

Postby denizaksulu » Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:24 pm

BC Numismatics wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:
BC Numismatics wrote:Deniz,Ataturk was very authoritarian,but Pakistan's founder,Quaid-i-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah (who was the first Governor-General of the Dominion of Pakistan from Independence in August 1947 until his death in late 1948) is remembered as a national hero.Interestingly,Jinnah's descendants live in India.

Here's a link; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Ali_Jinnah .

Aidan.



Aidan, What many people do not understand is the effect of islam on the Turkish people at the time. What they needed was what you call an 'authoritarian' hand to wake them up from there deep ISLAM INDUCED SLUMBER.
MKemal is not only a great Military hero for his people but also a great leader as well. Outsiders would never understand that and only go by dictionary definitions.
I wish somebody would read what Ernest Hemingway wrote of the Great man. and I am not talking of the Snows of the Kilimanjaro.


Deniz,I know about Ataturk's achievements,but I reckon that Mohammad Ali Jinnah did a lot in the area of fighting for both the independence of India & the independence of Pakistan.Unlike Ataturk,Jinnah achieved his goal by non-violent means,as did Mahatma Gandhi.

Aidan.



I appreciate what you are saying Aidan. But Jinnah did not have the Russians, the Armenians, the Kurds, more importantly the French, the English, the Italians and last but not least the Hellenes carving up the Ottoman Empire and invading. He only managed to get rid of the British from Istanbul and the Dardanelles with tough talking and threats.

Do you think they asked M. Kemals pemission to carve and invade?
User avatar
denizaksulu
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 36077
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 11:04 am

Postby zan » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:06 am

Tribute to Kamal Ataturk
Prof Dr Sufia Ahmed

Sixty-six years ago Mustafa Kamal Ataturk, the founder of Modern Turkey breathed his last on 10th November, 1938. On this solemn occasion an attempt has been made to relate how the people of Bengal along with the rest of the people of the Indian sub-Continent were deeply influenced by the ideas and achievements of Mustafa Kamal Ataturk, who was unquestionably a successful military commander the founder of a state, a nation builder, a moderniser of his society, and extraordinarily capable political leader, a creator of political institutions, and an educator of his nation.
Ataturk is indeed one of those rare charismatic political leaders whose historical and moral influence has transcended the boundaries of his own country, and became an "international phenomenon." Beyond the borders of his homeland Ataturk is revered as "one of the first successful anti-imperialist leaders of the Third World, as a statesman who deeply believed and contributed to world peace, and was one of the outstanding men in the liberation movements of the 20th century".

A befitting tribute was paid to him at the General Conference of the UNESCO in 1981 which adopted a resolution and referred to him as one of those "eminent personalities who should serve as an example for future generations, as Ataturk was an exceptional reformer and because, in particular, he was the leader of one of the earliest struggles against colonialism and imperialism."

Beyond the borders of his homeland Ataturk is revered as "one of the first successful anti-imperialist leader of the Third World, as a statesman who deeply believed in and contributed to world peace" and "as one of the outstanding men in the liberation movements of the 20th century."

The people of South Asia were one of the first to perceive intensely and appreciate at the initial stage the real worth and significance of Mustafa Kamal Ataturk's "unparalleled struggle and exploits." The victory of the Turks against the Greeks at the battle of sakarya in 1921 was a "moral fillip" to the Muslim world which began to realise that the Oriental nations could stand their ground in a "duel with Europe." The very fact that Mustafa Kamal had successfully defied Europe, stimulated Muslim unrest all over the world, backed by the Muslim Eastern Press, which passionately urged the Muslims to rally round Turkey -- the only independent Muslim country.

The influence of Mustafa Kamal's movement was also profoundly felt in Bengal. During the second decade of the 20th century, the Muslims of Bengal, along with their compatriots in the different regions of India, were surging with new nationalistic political stirrings which found practical expression through various movements. In Bengal, the Muslims had specific reasons to feel politically discontented and emotionally frustrated. The partition of Bengal in 1905, which had created a new Muslim majority province of "Eastern Bengal and Assam" was revoked in 1911. The new province had emerged as a boon to the Muslims as it opened up new opportunities and privileges which were denied to them under the previous administrative set up.

The annulment of the partition of Bengal served as a death blow to Muslim sentiment and aspirations. The British government further lost credibility among the Muslims of Bengal as the question of founding of a new University at Dhaka which was promised to them as a compensation in 1912 was shelved, and it actually did not materialise until 1921.

The news relating to the Italo-Turkish War (1911) and the Balkan Wars (1911-1913) in the Middle East created serious misgivings in the minds of the Muslims against the British rulers. Through these external events coupled with the distressing internal situation, the Muslims of Bengal saw a clear expression of what they were vaguely beginning to feel, that Western imperialism, specifically British, was bent upon destroying Islamic culture, and oppressing Muslims all over the world.

Their anger with the government at the reunification of the province of Bengal was reinforced in 1914 by their concern over Turkey's alliance with Germany against England in World War I. Indian Muslims regarded the Sultan-Khalifa of Turkey as the spiritual head of Sunni Islam, and the fact that he was now at war with Great Britain imposed a severe strain on their loyalty to the British government. All the more so, as pan-Islamic sentiment was unusually strong among the Muslims during that period.

The new trend among the Muslims during this period was to read with avid interest essays and poems with anti-British flavour, expressing sorrow over the loss of power by Muslims at different periods of history, at the hands of the imperialist Western powers. The Bengali Muslim literary figures expressed their discontent through their writings, and the were warmly received by the people at large. In Bengal poems, verses and the press were important media through which mass enthusiasm was aroused in favour of political and other issues.

In this connection the name of the talented poet Syed Abu Muhammad Ismail Hossain Shirazi of Pabna deserves special mention. The Muslims of Bengal owe a great deal for their intellectual and political renaissance to this fiery speaker, fighter, and writer in the realm of poetry and prose. Shirazi had the unique opportunity to be included as a member of the All-Indian Medical Mission which was sent in 1912 by the Indian Muslims to Turkey during the Balkan Wars, to aid the Turkish soldiers with moral and material support. On his return Shirazi wrote about his experiences in a book entitled Turoshka Bharaman (travels in Turkey) in Bengali published in 1913. In this book Shirazi depicts the tragic condition of the Ottoman army fighting the Balkan wars, and the shabby treatment meted out to Turkey by the Western powers. He was a great supporter of the Turkish war of Independence organized and led by Mustafa Kamal.

The writings of Shirazi and other literary figures made a deep impact on the minds of the Bengali Muslims and made them conscious of other Muslims and their plight, living beyond the confines of their own country. It was in this psychologically and emotionally receptive state of mind and feelings, the Muslims of Bengal became aware of the Nationalist Movement in Turkey and its great leader Mustafa Kamal Ataturk. To the Muslims of Bengal, as with the rest of the people of India, he came to symbolize the spirit of resurgence of nascent nationalist opposition to Western domination in Asia.

In Bengal, along with the poets and prose-writers, historians, journalists and political leaders have also played a major role in propagating the achievements of Ataturk among the Muslims of Bengal. "As a pioneer of anti-colonialism and nationalism" Ataturk became a "symbolic hero" to the people of the Sub-continent. This succeeded in making a powerful emotional appeal to the Muslims of Bengal, and had helped to infuse a new spirit of hope in the community. His attainments provided a sustainable theme through which the Bengali Muslims expressed their discontent.

The deep and penetrating influence of Mustafa Kamal Ataturk's revolutionary ideas and concept of nationalism had bequeathed a permanent legacy helping to give a new direction, and to usher in a new era in the field of Bengali literature. He came to be regarded as a legendary hero to whom glowing tributes were paid in prose and poetry. Ataturk's activities had a profound impact on the thought process of the Muslim leaders.

Among others, the great Bengali Muslim leader Abul Kasem Fazlul Huq took an effective part in the Indian Khilafat Movement (1918-1922) and was a great admirer of Turkey and its nationalist leader Mustafa Kamal. The other prominent Bengali Muslim intellectuals who popularized the cause of Turkey and accomplishments of Ataturk in Bengal, was Maulana Akram Khan a reputed theologian and an outstanding journalist. Mustafa Kamal's resounding victory over the Greeks, inspired no less a person than the revolutionary Bengali Muslim Poet Kazi Nazrul Islam to produce famous political poems like the Rana Bheri (Trumpet call to Battle) and the more popular Kamal Pasha, published respectively in September and October 1921. According to Abdul Qadir a Bengali Muslim poet and literary critic of high repute, Kazi Nazrul Islam was positively influenced by Mustafa Kamal and his ideas during the early years of his literary career. The soldier-poet Nazrul discovered in "Commander Kamal his cherished Hero" whom he later immortalised in his poem Vidrohi (an eternal rebel) "a symbol of an uncompromising fighter who would not give up his sword until he attains final victory."

The publication of these poems had created a deep impact on the minds of the Muslims of Bengal. The poem Kamal Pasha in particular became a special favourite among all sections of the people. A Bengali Muslim writer Khan Muhammad Moinuddin describes in his book Jugasrashtha Nazrul (Nazrul -- the Creator of a New Era published in 1921-22), the sensational effect of this poem on the people of his generation. He wrote, "I still fondly recall the memories of the great emotion and enthusiasm this poem aroused in our tender minds. It seemed to me as if the whole of Bengal had been stirred to its depth, surging with happiness and excitement. On the roads, street-corners, side-walks, and in the tea-shops, restaurants and social gathering, the poem Kamal Pasha was the main topic of discussion."

One other well-known publication of this category is a serialised drama, entitled Kamal Pasha written by a distinguished academician and a prominent literary figure Principal Ibrahim Khan, first published in 1926.

The news of the sad demise of Ataturk on November 10, 1938 who was regarded in Bengal as "the invincible dynamic Muslim hero" came as a rude shock to the people. As the contemporary newspapers and journals reveal a wave of shock and grief swept the country, and his death was universally mourned by the enlightened, the educated, and by the masses. In the typical fashion, the Bengali Muslims expressed their grief, and paid homage and rich tributes to Ataturk, through the medium of literature and the press. This sad event became the most favourite subject of the writers of that period such as Begum Sufia Kamal, Poet Shahadat Hossain, Poet Talim Hossain and many others.

The popular daily newspaper "Azad" of Maulana Akram Khan came out with banner headlines on 11th November 1938 saying: "The world's greatest statesman and maker of modern Turkey Ghazi Kamal Ataturk passes away." In its issue of 19 November 1938, the paper published detailed accounts of the Kamal Dibash or "Kamal Day" observed on 18th November in Calcutta and in different regions of the province of Bengal. The Mourning Day was observed by holding condolence meetings and offering funeral prayers in absentia in the mosques. Popular newspapers and journals like the Dhaka Prakash, Mashik Muhammadi, Shaugat and others published editorials, numerous articles, essays and poems through which the Bengali Muslims and non-Muslims paid their homage to Ataturk.

The highest tribute was paid to Ataturk by the great Bengali poet Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore who was deeply grieved by his death. At the condolence meeting organized by him at his own University "SHANTINIKETAN" he spoke in November 1938, saying:

"Turkey was once called the 'Sickman of Europe' until Kamal came and set before us an example of a new Asia where living present recalled the glories of a dead past .........Kamal Pasha's heroism was not on the battle field only, he waged a relentless war against the tyranny of blind superstition which perhaps is the deadliest enemy a people have to contend against. To his own people he was a great deliverer, to us he should remain a great example."

Dr Sufia Ahmed is a national professor.
User avatar
zan
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16213
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:55 pm

Postby zan » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:12 am

UNESCO Resolution
on the
ATATURK CENTENNIAL
"Convinced that personalities who worked for understanding and cooperation between nations and international peace will be examples for future generations,
"Recalling that the hundredth anniversaryof the birth of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, founder of the Turkish Republic, will be celebrated in 1981,

"Knowing that he was an exceptional reformer in all fields relevant to the competence of UNESCO,

"Recognizing in particular that he was the leader of the first struggle given against colonialism and imperialism,

"Recalling that he was the remarkable promoter of the sense of understanding between peoples and durable peace between the nations of the world and that he worked all his life for the development of harmony and cooperation between peoples without distinction of color, religion and race,

"It is decided that UNESCO should colloborate in 1981 with the Turkish Government on both intellectual and technical plans for an international colloquium with the aim of acquainting the world with the various aspects of the personality and deeds of Atatürk whose objective was to promote world peace, international understanding and respect for human rights."
User avatar
zan
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16213
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:55 pm

Postby zan » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:13 am

Peace at Home, Peace in the World

"Mankind is a single body and each nation a part of that body. We must never say 'What does it matter to me if some part of the world is ailing?' If there is such an illness, we must concern ourselves with it as though we were having that illness."
A military hero who had won victory after victory against many foreign invaders, Atatürk knew the value of peace and, during his Presidency, did his utmost to secure and strengthen it throughout the world. Few of the giants of the modern times have spoken with Atatürk's eloquence on the vital need to create a world order based on peace, on the dignity of all human beings, and on the constructive interdependence of all nations. He stated, immediately after the Turkish War of Independence, that "peace is the most effective way for nations to attain prosperity and happiness." Later as he concluded treaties of friendship and created regional ententes, he affirmed: " Turks are the friends of all civilized nations." The new Turkey established cordial relations with all countries, including those powers which had tried a few years earlier to wipe the Turks off the map. She did not pursue a policy of expansionism, and never engaged in any act contrary to peaceful co-existence. Atatürk signed pacts with Greece, Rumania and Yugoslavia in the Balkans, and with Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan in the East. He maintained friendly relations with the Soviet Union, the United States, England, Germany, Italy, France, and all other states. In the early 1930s, he and the Greek Premier Venizelos initiated and signed a treaty of peace and cooperation.

In 1932, the League of Nations invited Turkey to become a member. Many of Atatürk's ideas and ideals presaged the principles enshrined in the League of Nations and the United Nations." As clearly as I see daybreak, I have the vision of the rise of the oppressed nations to their independence... If lasting peace is sought, it is essential to adopt international measures to improve the lot of the masses. Mankind's well-being should take the place of hunger and oppression... Citizens of the world should be educated in such a way that they shall no longer feel envy, avarice and vengefulness."

In recognition of Atatürk's untiring efforts to build peace, the League of Nations paid tribute to him at his death in November 1938 as " a genius international peacemaker". In 1981, on the occasion of the Centennial of his birth, the United Nations and UNESCO honored the memory of the great Turkish Statesman who abhorred war - " Unless the life of the nation faces peril, war is a crime," - and expressed his faith in organized peace:" If war were to break out, nations would rush to join their armed forces and national resources. The swiftest and most effective measure is to establish an international organization which would prove to the aggressor that its aggression cannot pay."

His creation of modern Turkey and his contribution to the world have made Atatürk an historic figure of enduring influence.
User avatar
zan
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16213
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:55 pm

Postby shahmaran » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:40 pm

Excellent findings Zan, thank you for all this.
User avatar
shahmaran
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 5461
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:58 pm
Location: In conflict

Postby 74LB » Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:20 pm

As I posted earlier.........It doesn't matter what anyone says, if you are Turkish or Turkish Cypriot then Mustafa Kemal is "the Father of all Turks" and no slur on his name or achievements will make this any different.
74LB
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:16 pm
Location: UK

Postby boomerang » Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:05 am

Yes you said turks...but not everyone is a turk in turkey...what about all the kurds, greeks, assyrians, armenians that got the end of the stick?

The way you potrayed him is like he only looked out for the chosen few...


PS...and here is me thinking that kemal was the father of the republic...
User avatar
boomerang
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7337
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 5:56 am

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest