This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Obama Says Turkey's "Ally" Status In Doubt Unless Country Changes Its Pro-Iran, Anti-Israel Stance
Ever since the Gaza flotilla incident, in which several Turkish citizens were killed after a boat headed with supplies to the Palestine (with full politically correct details still being ironed out on who attacked whom and all that), was attacked, relations between Turkey and Israel have been horrendous, and deteriorating rapidly. Demonstrating just how seriously Israel is concerned with the Turkey (which also happens to be a NATO member, and in possession of lots of ultramodern things that go boom) relations hit, is today's first ever visit by Netanyahu to Athens, where he is scheduled to meet with Greek counterpart and country's opposition leader, to streamline Israel's relationship with Turkey's traditional antagonist, wisely driven by the principle of "the enemy of my enemy." (More on Netanyahu's historic visit via Haaretz). Yet where it is getting very dicey, is the just released report from the FT, which notes that "President Barack Obama has personally warned Turkey’s prime minister that unless Ankara shifts its position on Israel and Iran it stands little chance of obtaining the US weapons it wants to buy." And more: "One senior administration official said: “The president has said to Erdogan that some of the actions that Turkey has taken have caused questions to be raised on the Hill [Congress] . . . about whether we can have confidence in Turkey as an ally. That means that some of the requests Turkey has made of us, for example in providing some of the weaponry that it would like to fight the PKK, will be harder for us to move through Congress." It is unfortunate that the administration still believes intimidation is the best policy course when it comes to resolving latent (and soon to be bilaterally uranium-enriched) middle-east conflicts. Should this path of "negotiation" be insisted on, Obama may soon alienate a critical NATO-member and the country located at the most strategic location at the Europe-Middle East nexus. And this does not even account for the political unrest that is sure to develop should the country's 72 million disgruntled citizens decide the US (and its Middle East interests) are not their ally.
More from the FT:
Washington was deeply frustrated when Turkey voted against United Nations sanctions on Iran in June.
When the leaders met later that month at the G20 summit in Toronto, Mr Obama told Mr Erdogan that the Turks had failed to act as an ally in the UN vote. He also called on Ankara to cool its rhetoric about an Israeli raid that killed nine Turks on a flotilla bearing aid for Gaza.
While the two men have subsequently sought to co-operate over Iraq’s efforts to patch together a coalition government, the US makes clear its warning still stands.
“They need to show that they take seriously American national security interests,” said the administration official, adding that Washington was looking at Turkish conduct and would then assess if there were “sufficient efforts that we can go forward with their request”.
US law requires the administration to notify Congress 15 days ahead of big arms sales to Nato allies such as Turkey. Although technically such sales can proceed – unless Congress passes legislation to stop them – resistance on Capitol Hill can push administrations to abandon politically unpopular sales.
Turkey has sought drones for several years. But its drive has taken on greater urgency both because of the continuing US withdrawal from Iraq and the tensions with Israel, which has provided Ankara with pilotless Heron aircraft.
Turkish officials characterise the military relationship with the US as very good but declined to comment on specific procurement requests. The administration has not notified Congress of any big arms sale to Turkey to date this year.
All in all, more news that should merely propel stocks to new record highs, now that global thermonuclear warfare and homo sapiens Extinction Level Events are firmly priced in.
»
- 7738 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I think it is all a game played by real rulers of Turkey, USA and Israel like the Gaza flotilla game - all this to con people in these countries and Muslims that there is enemity and to "conveniently" place Turkey in the opposite camp when a conflict arises. All a game to fool the mis-informed people. Let's look at it from money side - we can believe this when Turkey closes the Oil pipeline carrying European/American interests.
Turkey should leave NATO, and Erdogan does not
give a damn about the constitutionalist-turned-Nobel
Price for Peace, is btw a 'laic state', is running
a 3.25% growth. When was the last time the Statesman
left the Continent ? Another Rahm-inspired disaster in the
making...
So Turkey has now officially joined the Axis of Evil...
To be fair, Turkey also twists our tit. Every time that Armenian genocide statement comes up at the UN, the US won't vote for it. It's just politics.
So the millions of dead American Indians don't count?
500,000 Philipinos?
300,000 Guatamalans?
3 million Vietnamese?
1 million Iraqis?
etc
etc
etc
Yes, they do count. You might notice that I am the only one talking about them while others post racist links and ignore their hypocritical pasts.
Burned into the brain of every Ukranian. Many of the perpetrators fled to Israel when they threatened Stalin
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999,00.html
Please Read the details about so called Armenian Genocide.
You may try understand the other sides opinion:
http://tallarmeniantale.com/
A country behaving like this has an "unbreakable bond" with the US and is seen as an ally?? Shame on America. It is almost a compliment to not be seen as an ally.
Respect to Turkey for standing up to Israel. And to David Cameron for telling it how it is too.
I think this blog is filled with antisemitism.
Instead of talking against Israel, just write what you really think (that you are sorry Hitler lost).
You are all Hippocrates !
I hope you will all live under Muslim law...
We're all "Hippocrates"? How interesting. I hadn't realized that this was a physician-focused blog. I'll go grab my white lab coat and be sure to take Wednesday afternoon off from now on.
simple typo mistake.
Here you go:
Hypocrites - Hypocrisy is the act of pretending to have beliefs, opinions, virtues, feelings, qualities, or standards that one does not actually have. Hypocrisy involves the deception of others and is thus a kind of lie.
Dude, with Obamacare approaching, no more Wednesday's off. LOL
Sadly you are correct. Americans largely are hypocrites, and there is plenty of racism too. Not just from whites, but racism is racism. Americans are quite comfortable condemning others for actions they also carry out. Mexicans are essentially slave labor, 50 years ago blacks couldn't even eat in the same restaurants as whites, and don't even bring up the Native Americans. Most Americans are more subtly racist, with their economic war on the poor. Notice that as white Americans get poorer they talk about this warfare more? Because it finally affects them.
Why talk for all the other races when you discuss racism? As a jew will you admit jews are quite possibly the most racist?
Israel is notoriously racist. Israel won't even recognize a wedding between a jew and non-jew. That's batshit crazy, wouldn't you say?
Even my jewish friends admit to being racists, in fact they're proud of it!
I'm not jewish, I just dislike hypocricy, and assuming you are a white american, you are the prime example. I suspect that racism is just part of the human condition, part of the lizard brain we have. But some people like you choose to give into it, celebrate it, and that is not excusable. You are a racist.
If he is a racist for taking on what some perceive as a threat due to disproportionate power of Jewish people, then are you not a racist for thinking Muslims are a threat? I smell a double standard..
BTW, i'm not responsible for what my forefathers did or didn't do. I'm responsible for what I do and how I protect and raise my children. I simply cannot accept responsibility for the atrocities done to the Africans and Native American on this continent in the past 400 years. It is fruitless and only serves to turn the spot light away from those committing atrocities today.
The statement about the wedding is factually incorrect. All marriages are recognised in Israel. However, if you want to marry in a Jewish religious ceremony, both bride and groom obviously have to be Jewish. Duh. Try to arrange a catholic wedding for a Christian and a Muslim, see what the minister says.
Actually a Catholic can marry a non-Catholic (including a non-Christian) and have the wedding performed by a Catholic Priest, as well as being recognized by the Catholic Church as valid.
http://www.nccbuscc.org/laity/marriage/marriagefaqs.shtml
"Duh"
And protestants can marry other religions as well.. Everyone knows, it's often the butt of jokes, how upset a Jewish mother would be for marrying a non-jew.. LMAO
Of course, I must add to this, All Jews I know couldn't care less who their children marry as long as they are happy. I wouldn't consider them even remotely racist.
As far as Israel is concerned, I would refer to the book by Jack Bernstein: "An American Jew" who went to Israel and saw first hand how racist the Jews there are. Since he was a Jew himself and couldn't effectively be dismissed as a racist, he was promptly murdered. One of many Jews that have given their Life or Freedom or Fortune to expose certain crimes being committed.
Max - I went to [the always impartial] Wiki to find 'Jack Bernstein' and all they have is soome boxer from 100 years ago. Where is there more on this guy?
Thanks
The fact that many Palestinians think that the plight of certain peoples was commemorized as an excuse to steal their country is hard to remove as their birthrate proceeds apace.
Not "hippocrates, I think you meant to say "hippopotamus storage vehicle".
Turkey-Israel has been going downhill at least since the fighting in Gaza one year ago January and can be traced back to Erdogan kiboshing the northern Irag invasion in 2003. The Gaza flotilla show was just the most blatant so far.
Not looking like a course correcting coup anytime soon either.
Each week it seems we get more evidence that Israel’s “special relationship” with America increases the danger to America’s special interests. Added to the above report, yesterday’s news brought fresh evidence from the AP that Arab nations have increased demands for Israel to come clean about its nuclear arsenal.
At the same time, Netanyahu journeys, not to Ankara to improve relations, but to Athens for the first time in years, to Turkey’s on-going enemy, to make relations worse. The man is a war criminal.
Last week, our news was that Russia would be providing fuel for Iranian reactors; leading one to speculate where the next move in this Mediterranean chess game will be made by Russia.
No drones from the US for Turkey? In addition to nuclear fuel, Russia has drones and an air defense system to protect Iran, and its next move now may involve Turkey. As always Obama is caught like a deer in the headlights, with AIPAC at the wheel.
Just why is our foreign policy dictated by Israeli interests rather than our own? In the end, will we all be Palestinians?
Those who ignore the role of the U.S. banking system, the neo-cons and the neo-libs (all primarily Jewish) and Israel in this build-up for world war are ignoring the elephant in the room. The steps U.S. policy makers used to bring on the Iraq war, and now a war with Iran, outline the pattern.
But without the Fed, none of it would be possible. As Lew Rockwell said in 2008 in “War and Inflation”:
“The U.S. central bank, called the Federal Reserve, was created in 1913. No one promoted this institution with the slogan that it would make wars more likely and guarantee that nearly half a million Americans would die in battle in foreign lands, along with millions of foreign soldiers and civilians. No one pointed out that this institution would permit Americans to fund, without taxes, the destruction of cities abroad and overthrow governments at will. No one said that the central bank would make it possible for the U.S. to be at a large-scale war in one of every four years for a full century. It was never pointed out that this institution would make it possible for the U.S. government to establish a global empire that would make Imperial Rome and Britain look benign by comparison…”
Rockwell concluded: “It comes down to this. If you hate war, oppose the Fed. If you hate violations of your liberties, oppose the Fed. If you want to restrain despotism, restrain the Fed. It you want to secure freedom for yourself and your descendants, abolish the Fed.”
Does anyone get the icky feeling that some people in the far background are setting up WWIII for their own profit, and that this time the US will be playing the role of the "Axis"?
LOL Mad Max, but:
Nope.
Amerika will be the John Wayne heroes again...
Like military spending, the US has more flag wavin' media propaganda than the rest ot the world combined...
Sing it with me!
US, US über alles,
Über alles in der Welt,
To quote Dr. Strangelove: "Mein Fuhrer, I can walk!!! Uh, excuse me, Mr. President."
or should I say "O Parador, O Parador..."
Anyway, you get the point. From an american perspective I'm sure we will be the heroes. Know what, I'll bet most Germans thought they were the heroes too. Those greedy Sudetenlanders, sort of Deutsch-like but really too Bohemian to be quite the Ubermensch.... Those greedy Poles, always demanding to be "alive." Those darn Russkies, what with their impenetrable ice-and-mud-fortress of poverty and isolation. All evil! Evil I say!
+100%
So what does/will it take to Revoke the Federal Reserve Act of 1913?
A body count in the high 8 to low 9 digit range.
It all depends on who is doing the revokin'.
As always Obama is caught like a deer in the headlights, with AIPAC at the wheel.
JR - Great post. End the Fed.
all I can say regarding the middle-east, who's in the right and who's not, what the West's policy towards it should or shouldn't be, and who influences the above is...
Follow the money.
Turkey should just tell OBAMA! to stuff his black arshole with a jewish dick and fu*§ off
I think your pills are over there on the coffee table...
That would be unnecessary.
Turkey is not a real country.
To find their place in the 21st century Turkey should have implemented self-government for Armenia and Kurdistan. Look around the world at all the progressive countries. The appropriate way to deal with justifiable greviences from minority ethnic groups is to give them self-government over their homelands.
The fact that Turkey still wants to kill Armenians and Kurds to silence their voices speaks volumes about the backward, slovenly approach to internal issues that passes for Turkish governance.
Also, St. Sophia's should have been given back to the Orthodox Church in a formal ceremony. Apologies and damages should have been awarded for the past barbaric expressions of Turkish pride.
when are you going to give quebec back to the french then?
It would be cheaper for the rest of Canada if Quebec decided to go. All they needed to do is get that "Yes" vote in either of their referendums on the question (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum).
I see that you do not know a lot of things, one being the Canadian concept of referendums. A great deal of political energy was spilt in Quebec and the rest of Canada for about 25 years (starting in the late 1970's). Referendums were held to allow Quebecers to decide where they wanted to go. They have voted to stay with the rest of Canada.
and Germany needs to be compensated by Italy for all of Julius Caesar's war crimes.
It's good to see the Germans raising a stink about Turkey's recent use of chemical weapons against the Kurds.
http://rudaw.net/english/news/turkey/3109.html
If Israel attacks Iran,Turkey will be key. The reason in the event of an attack,the Iraqi governement will collapse. The military and police will defect to the shia and sunni insurgents. When this happens US troops and those god damn defense contractors will be surrounded. Saudi Arabia will dissolve into chaos because Iran will instigate Islamic revolution there with their special forces and cells. Even if the US can circumvent an attempt from shia militias and Iranian to cut supply lines in Kuwait,Iraq will plunge into chaos and US troops will surrounded and and face heavy resistance. If Turkey refuses to allow US reinforcements to pass its border into Iraq things will get sticky and very grave.
On the topic of Islamic revolution,Iran and Hezbollah have cells in Egypt,Jordan,Kuwait,Dubai,Bahrain,Qatar,Saudi Arabia,Yemen,and Iraq. Iran knows that in a conventional war it will get crushed,and its military wiped out. So they are doing something smarter. Iran has a lot assymetrical weapons for the US and Israel. They will use their cells and special forces to instigate total islamic revolution (french revolution style) in the nations I mention above. Egypt and Saudi Arabia are very vunerable because their populace hate the ruling governement that are seen as pupets or collaborators with the imperialist west. These two nations are one flare up from islamic revoultion. If these two nations governments get over throned or have civil war. This will change the face of the middle east forever. Iran will try to cut supply lines from Kuwait in Route Tampa from to iraq 50,000 US troops and 30,000 contractors(mercenaries). Israel will be facing rocket and missiles attacks from Gaza,Lebanon,Iran,Syria which will put the pressure on Israel's anti missile defense systems.
Iran and lebanon want a symbolic victory. For Hizballah it is an Israeli jet or two shot down,and one or two israeli ships sunk down by their many anti ship missiles. For Iran its a pinned down and surrounded US military in Iraq and Afghanistan by heavily armed locals. And an aircraft carrier sunk by a mine in the Port of Hormuz. Many neo cons think in terms of conventional war just like they did in iraq and Afghanistan. In the mideast they see symbolic victories to bring more people to their cause. An attack on Iran would be the worst decision since Ike and Tina got together. Why dont we close every single military base around the world and bring them home to protect the border. Let the Turks,Arabs,and Persians destroy each other if they want to go to war.
The question is.
Bush and Obama run the same agenda.
Who is or are the puppet masters ? Who is holding the strings ?
follow the money, and you'll find the puppetmasters
Here's one idea
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/200.html
Netanyahu borrowed a couple of Jamie Dimon's puppet strings to make Obummer dance a warning Turkey jig...
Dance Wall Street puppet... Dance, Obummer, dance...
Crude Oil producers financed by Federal Reserve credit keeps the wheels of Justice well-lubed into the 21st Century.
When will the evidence surface that Bin Laden is in Turkey???
Seriously, how fucking pathetic the media still pretends the boogie man is still alive.
Ron Paul's non-interventionist policies would be best.
Governor Palin, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh oppose the Mosque and the first amendment (religion… “or the free exercise thereof,” etc) for one reason: their success depends on support from Jews in America.
Take him or leave him, you’ll never see Rush Limbaugh the same way again, after you’ve read the following:
WAR, KILLING CIVILIANS AND RUSH LIMBAUGH by Dale Graham | LewRockwell.com
August 11, 2010 -- Rush Limbaugh (program on July 26, 2010), while discussing his discontents with the rules of engagement that US military forces operate under in Afghanistan, made the following comment: "It used to be back in the days when we fought wars to win them that civilian deaths were the object." One of the purposes of the Allied bombing of civilian centers in World War 2 was to put pressure on the Axis governments to cease hostilities. "We wanted the civilian population to demand that their government surrender. That’s how you win wars. The other guys surrender because they’re losing too much."
"War is a terrible thing," says Rush, and then cautions his audience not to take his remarks out of context.
What context is he talking about? Mr. Limbaugh wasn’t merely making an observation that modern wars have been characterized by a casual and too often calculated killing of civilians. No, he was making a prescriptive remark. You win wars by, among other things, killing as many of the enemy’s women and children and sick and old as you can. Then, when you’ve killed enough, your enemy will surrender. Sadly, Limbaugh is not alone in believing this.
This well-known image illustrates in a pure form what Limbaugh is advocating. A soldier is killing an enemy woman and child (see link). According to Limbaugh this act will aid this soldier’s country in its quest for victory. According to Limbaugh, while this act is "a terrible" thing, it is a proper application of state power in time of war against an enemy. Most people will recognize this action as an atrocity.
Rush Limbaugh’s understanding of war is fatuous. Why? We know, in fact, that the act of murder recorded in the above photograph did not help Germany win its war with the Soviet Union. The Germans killed between 23 and 25 million Soviet people, soldiers and civilians alike, but did not succeed in breaking their enemy’s will to resist. Actions like that recorded above only steeled the will to resist and exact revenge. As we know, the Soviet Union prevailed against Germany, grinding down the bulk of Germany’s military might and planting its flag atop the Reichstag, the symbol of German power.
The German bombing of London during the "Blitz" did not cause the British people to petition the British government to surrender to Hitler. On the contrary, British courage during this period is celebrated. While the bombing of Germany’s cities killed over 300,000 civilians and wounded over 780,000 this effort likewise failed to get the Germans "to demand that their government surrender" to the Allies. According to The United States Strategic Bombing Survey (European War):
The mental reaction of the German people to air attack is significant. Under ruthless Nazi control they showed surprising resistance to the terror and hardships of repeated air attack, to the destruction of their homes and belongings, and to the conditions under which they were reduced to live. Their morale, their belief in ultimate victory or satisfactory compromise, and their confidence in their leaders declined, but they continued to work efficiently as long as the physical means of war production remained. The power of a police state over its people cannot be under-estimated.
And while it is an article of faith among many, including Limbaugh, that Japan surrendered because of the atomic bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, modern scholarship shows that other factors had more significance in producing this outcome than the killing of approximately 230,000 people (immediate and long-term effects, including 7 Allied POWs).
In sum, the instrumental argument that targeting civilians is a victory-enhancing policy is false. The mass slaughter of civilians does not achieve much except a pile of dead civilians, unless that is your goal.
While Limbaugh argues that he is a defender of freedom he seems not to notice that approving of the targeting of civilians in war is endorsing one of the tenets and consequences of the concept of Total War. If there was ever a totalitarian concept, it is the idea of total war. Here, every part of the enemy society is considered a legitimate target because everything in a society is a resource of the warring state. Every newborn child is a potential soldier or worker and therefore a valid target. Every woman of childbearing years is a potential source of such potential soldier/worker babies, and therefore a legitimate target. And so it goes throughout the whole of the society. To endorse the concept of total war is to adopt the Fascist mantra of "Everything within the State, nothing outside the State." By viewing the opposing nation through this prism, whether valid or not, the logic of total war will see the movement to impose totalitarian measures on one’s own society to prosecute a war. Limbaugh’s argument for targeting civilians is, therefore, an implicit endorsement of totalitarian state power.
A common argument that could be offered in support of Limbaugh’s prescription is that "there are no rules" in war. One does what one must to survive. This argument looks upon moral concerns in war as foolish at best and fatal at worst. "War is a terrible thing," says Limbaugh, but necessity should rule the day. The end (victory or survival) justifies the means. This is the code of Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler. The image above illustrates where this principle leads. But then, if survival is the primary value and justifies anything for its attainment, why not just surrender straight off and spare yourself the risk of getting killed? If the Islamic jihadists want you to become a Moslem then is that too much a price to pay for survival? If anything is justified in surviving, then surely becoming a Moslem is an easy price to pay. But surrender is not what those who offer the argument that no act is out of bounds in war, have in mind. The unstated assumption is that they want to survive in a preferred condition or state or with a set of values intact: to survive as a Pole, as a Christian, as a free person. However, if by defending your values you abandon them in the process and adopt the evil means of your foe then what in fact are you defending?
Interestingly, three days after the program we’ve been discussing, Limbaugh discussed his dismay at the depravity of contemporary American culture. He explained that this was a result of a loss in a belief in God. Limbaugh says he believes in God. He believes in absolute values of right and wrong. He believes in the concept of universal morality. And, he also believes that targeting civilians in war is proper. Atrocity is an absolute good?
There are fundamental contradictions in the political and moral views among many Americans who describe themselves as "conservatives" and Limbaugh exemplifies them. Limbaugh asserts that he believes in human freedom, limited government, decency and eternal values of right and wrong. He is one of the Good Guys. The Bad Guys are opposed to what Limbaugh upholds. Yet, the contradiction can be seen in his endorsement of the targeting of civilians in war. The Just War doctrine, developed by St. Augustine, Erasmus, and others holds that the deliberate killing of non-combatants is impermissible, that Christians should observe limits in the application of deadly force, even in war. Limbaugh’s prescription is not within this tradition, but in the "tradition" of Total War. As I suggest above, Total War is a concept that is congruent with the concept of the Total State. Total War is a totalitarian concept, a concept that asserts the primacy of state power. "Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." Limbaugh has demonstrated, certainly since 9-11, that he is comfortable with the exercise of state power in some of its most malign forms: torture, the killing of enemy wounded, and, now, the slaughter of the unarmed. Limbaugh, I believe, loves militarism and the American warfare state more than he loves freedom. There is more Leninism than libertarianism in Limbaugh’s soul.
Look at the image (the killing) above. Is this what we want America to be? Remember, the means color the ends.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/graham-d1.1.1.html
Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. His Number One job is to deliver ears to the advertisers - as many ears as he can. He does this by being controversial. I would not trust anything Rush says on air to be a statement of true belief. I would trust it to be designed to stir up controversy, to attract listeners and callers.
I have several problems with your argument presented above. But the biggest problem I have is that you are arguing at all. Rush speaks to ignite controversy, not rational discussion such as you have presented.
I am not “entertained” by scenes of American cemeteries and the burial of young men who died for the Zionists. I am not “entertained” by the rush to yet another war on a sovereign country that does not threaten American interests. It is not entertaining that the developing opposition to the socialist agenda in the United States is being co-opted by Jewish-supported politicians the likes of Governor Palin (with a flag of Israel in her office) and her neo-con supporters.
And make no mistake, support for the wars of Iraq and Afghanistan have happened in part because of the lies and extremely strong commentary from “entertainers” such as Limbaugh.
When the take-back-America grassroots movement in 1994 swept Republicans into office, Newt Gingrich and other neo-cons, late in the movement as it gained momentum, quickly stepped in front of the parade with their own agenda to claim victory and re-label the movement “Contract With America.” Has anybody noticed that the town hall meetings and tea party movements springing up all around the country are being similarly co-opted by the Zionist neo-cons?
Radio and television are opinion forces. Somehow, I think “entertainment” should be a trifle more satisfying, beautiful, or funny... and less deadly.
JR, it is easy to tell this is simply a game to you. Similar to "Ass"angel of Wikileaks, you do not care who you harm so long as you feel good doing it.
A couple of points about your post. First, do you have a definition of non-combatant? How is your definition applied?
Second, you appear to take umbrage at Palin, Hannity and Limbaugh for their opposition to the mosque on Ground Zero. You see their decision to oppose the construction of the mosque as an insult or sign of disrespect to the people of Islam. Can umbrage be called for against the backers of the mosque over their insult or sign of disrespect to the people of America? Who are the backers of the mosque anyways?
Is this a two way street?
Are there cultural values/norms that apply to both sides of this story?
Who are you to speak for the people of America?
This American believes in the rule of law: and that a real estate owner should be able to use his property subject to a maze of government regulations even if the mob disapproves of that use.
Just back from a visit to Europe, spent two nights in Cordoba.
During the Caliphate of Cordoba, 912-1009 AD, great tolerance was shown between Muslims, Christians and Jews. Relationships became rather strained as time progressed and later dynasties ruled from Seville and lastly Granada.
Let's pause a moment of gratitude for the Moors: because they studied and translated classical literature, destroyed in the west, they became the primary vector for the Renaissance.
Seems to me Canucklehead simply asked a series of relevant questions. How is that speaking for America? How is that denying the owners of property the full use of their property? As always, just because you can do something is not reason enough to do it. Civilized people know they can choose, but realize that sometimes their choice should be modified by the spectre of unintended consequences.
In the case of the mosque, Canucklehead is wondering if maybe those consequences are intended rather than unintended. If they are intended, then your argument is no longer relevant.
"over their insult or sign of disrespect to the people of America"
As I understand the Cordoba project it is hoped to bring faiths together to acknowledge their similarities rather than their points of difference, as was practiced effectively during the Cordoba Caliphate a thousand years ago. And what I find disappointing is how unwelcome and offensive this feels to"the people of America."
As for free use of real estate, of course it is subject to intense government regulation including extensive public participation. As an experienced real estate developer, sometimes I win, sometimes I lose, that's the system.
The protestors embraced the system, (opportunistically) claimed historical significance for the existing structure and failed. And now you say that, having won playing by our rules, the property owners are to abandon their enterprise due to "the spectre of unintended consequences"?
Can't we all just get along?
Actually, my point was that I believe Canucklehead's questions merit some careful thinking through. A more gracious guest would have perhaps not forced the protestors to have to embrace the system - and then lose. A more gracious guest would have perhaps been wise enough to bring the faiths together some further distance from such a sore spot for Americans.
RichardP,
We are all guests. We all have come from somewhere else.
As far as I am concerned an American Muslim is just as good an American as an American Christian. Do you agree with me?
Gromit,
Amazing.
Let's see:
Islam was a 'primary vector' for the Renaissance. The escape of Greek scholars with their manuscripts from Constantinople as it fell to Muslim Turkish invaders to Italy did indeed spark the Renaissance.
While it is true that Muslims did much to preserve classical learning, they were the ones that smashed half of the tottering remains of the Roman Empire.
The fact that you call for a moment of gratitude for the intellectual accomplishments of the Moors in Spain speaks either to a muslim viewpoint or a distinctly twisted view of history.
If it's the latter it's either the result of a poverty of education or a whiff of the sophisticated anti-Western self-loathing that aromizes this site.
Your history is a little rusty:
Constantinople fell to Suleiman the Magnificent in 1453, about a hundred years after the Renaissance was born in Tuscany.
The source of the classical literature of the early Renaissance was sourced from Moorish Spain. Sorry if you find this uncomfortable or offensive.
Gromit, Would you accept wiki as authority? Kindly google 'Renaissance'.
Regret disturbing your romance with Iberia, but according to this source Constantinople was the source of the Renaissance.
If you desire further elucidation, kindly refer to the magisterial Gibbon's 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. His word is definitive for all that respect learning.
No doubt, Cordoba was for a shining moment an intellectual beacon in a benighted Europe (Constantinople was preeminent), but to use that scrap of history as the purported reason for calling the projected mosque near ground zero the Cordoba Project because it seeks to foster comity among the religions, fails to address the fact that Islamic Holy Law prescribes that any territory that comes under Islamic law is forever part of the Islamic Empire. As such associating part of Manhattan with a name, Cordoba, that is recognized as a part of a spurious but murderously asserted Islamic Empire must be resisted by every self-interested Western man. To permit this encroachment (do not doubt it is incremental and unlimited in scope) is to scorn the advances of Europe and America over the savagery that dominates the Moslem world.
Proof of this can be see in France where 10% of the population is Islamic and threatens the fabric of society with bouts of mass fire bombings in large cities. The UK with 5% is beginning to witness these disturbances as with the disruption of solemn ceremonies for fallen troops. Also Indonesia is the scene of violent battles large and small between a predominant Islamic population persecuting a recoiling Christian population. All Moslem countries, by the virtue of their nature, persecute women, non-Islamists and minorities.
To hear their apologists speak, they are themselves the victims of misunderstanding and the soul of reason. Not everyone is fooled.
Now go back to your dreams of Cordoba.
Your history is a little rusty:
Constantinople fell to Suleiman the Magnificent in 1453, about a hundred years after the Renaissance was born in Tuscany.
Classical literature of the early Renaissance was sourced from Moorish Spain. Sorry if you find this uncomfortable or offensive.
Are there any examples of the early Renaissance in Moorish Spain? If it got it's start in Italy from the Moors in Spain, surely there were examples of the early Renaissance in Moorish Spain that caught the Italians' eye.
You know, the "I want that" factor.
What do you understand the definition of "Renaissance" to be? I understand it to be re-birth. I hope we are talking the same language.
Gromit, can you name a city or county where there was not a great deal of tolerance shown between Muslims, Christians and Jews? Maybe we can start there and see what your motiviations are.
The Moors were not respected by other Muslim denominations. The Moors no longer exist because of explusion by other Muslim denominations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moors
I'm also curious about your thoughts regarding St. Sophia's church in Istambul. You and I both know that for your premise to hold validity, that church should be turned back to the Orthodox Church.
Not quite sure where you are going with your first question, but in the context of medieval Spain tolerance was high in the Caliphate of Cordoba,significantly less so under the Almohads and the Amoravids, not much love lost between the Chritstian princes and the Nasrids at the end.
Yes there was friction between Moorish Spain and home base.
Your "definitive" statement of our joint opinions concerning Santa Sofia is just silly - it's standard operating procedure for the new ruling elite to "re-badge" churches when they do not destroy them completely and build over.
Thus the great mosque of Cordoba was built over a visigothic cathedral - which doubtless was built over something else. It was perhaps due to the remarkable level of religious tolerance of the twelth century that on the capture of Cordoba the great mosque was respected and is still a fine building to this day. And it is this tolerance that perhaps the Cordoba project wishes to re-create.
As a sign of mutual respect St Sophia should be returned to the Orthodox Church. These are not barbaric times. A progressive Muslim would understand the importance of St Sophia to an Orthodox Christian. God's work would be accomplished by Muslim hands if the gesture was made with heartfelt respect for other religions.
Is that the standard operating procedure you are alluding to? I suspect that would be God's desire.
And hopefully the Cordoba project will engender the desire to do something extraordinary like that.
But seriously, what are you trying to achieve? Santa Sofia was built on something else, maybe a roman polytheist temple which itself was built on a greek polytheist temple which itself was built on ?
Are you trying to settle a six hundred year old score? Would you like to crusade for Palestine while you are at it? Do you want the land Alexander conquered? Maybe we can give Manhattan back to the Native Americans, who can give it back to whoever they displaced.
By "standard operating procedure" I allude to the practice throughout history of a new ruling elite to take over religious buildings and either destroy them and build over them, or to revise the internal architecture to suit the new religion. The Christian Prince who overthrew the Cordoban Moors in 1164 did not rebadge the mosque, and perhaps it is this spirit of tolerance thta the Cordoba Project wishes to engender and sustain.
Let's start with St Sophia. It should be given back to the Orthodox Church. It reinforces a simple belief in God and can be resolved by a simple human gesture. The outpouring of good will from around the world would be remembered always.
Let's start with St Sophia's Church. Do you agree?
Let's not entreat that the Cordoba project may well lead to something like that. That is not the Cordoba project's purpose. Let's go to the head of the class. Let's grab the brass ring. Let's do something that will forever help mankind and mark a major effort at healing the rift between the world's religions.
Let's start with St Sophia.
What is your fixation on Santa Sofia?
Is this a personal crusade?
Thanks for your answer Gromit.
I think you also answered the question you had posed to RichardP.
As if enough of the world doesn't hate us enough already for what we have done, we have to ensure that they hate us for Israel's crimes too.
JR,
It is a surreal world wherein Turkey and Israel are on the outs, Israel goes to Greece and....wait for it....Netanyahu is a war criminal!
Once again, the baleful visage of Israel-hatred wears the (precariously askew) mask of reason.
And the idea that Erdogan wants to fall into the arms of Russia is really really bizarre. A thousand years of history, geography and elementary economics dismiss the idea.
The most preposterous part of the whole thing, the part where even Inspector Clouseau can look at it, say 'aha, nonsense' and be right, is where you careen off the Federal Reserve into another overheated goulash of world domination by those ubiquitous yet ever receding shadows, TPTB aka JOOOOOOOS!
By the by, Russian connivance vis-a-vis Israel extends not just to the Med but to the Caspian and the S-300 missiles planted in Abkhazia a few days ago to stymie an Israeli assault on Iran from that direction just at the Iranians announce their reactor goes on line the end of this month.
Of course it's all Israel's fault.
Reality is reality.
I said it is the existence of the Federal Reserve that provides the capacity for war. I did not say anything about "TPTB" of world domination-- the Federal Reserve Central Bank, the European Central Bank, the IMF, the World Bank--being Jewish. You did.
To quote Lew Rockwell again:
“If the goal of the state is the complete monopolization of money under an infinitely flexible paper-money system, there is no better path for the state than the creation of a central bank. This is the greatest achievement for the victory of power over liberty…
“Before the creation of the Federal Reserve, the idea of American entry into the conflict that became World War I would have been inconceivable. In fact, it was a highly unpopular idea, and Woodrow Wilson himself campaigned on a platform that promised to keep us out of war. But with a money monopoly, all things seem possible. It was a mere four years after the Fed was invented under the guise of scientific policy planning that the real agenda became obvious. The Fed would fund the U.S. entry into World War I…
“Fast–forward to the Iraq War, which has all the features of a conflict born of the power to print money. There was a time when the decision to go to war involved real debate in the U.S. House of Representatives. And what was this debate about? It was about resources, and the power to tax. But once the executive state was unhinged from the need to rely on tax dollars, and did not have to worry about finding willing buyers for its unbacked debt instruments, the political debate about war was silenced…”
Turkey is being taken over by the islamists. No way in hell will they ever side with NATO against anything muslim, or pro-Israel.
So much for the fallacy of Turkey becoming an EU member, either.
Islam is on the rise and west is in decline. Wahhabi/salafist religious schools and mosques are way more effective weapons for people's hearts and minds than western bombs and empty slogans about 'democracy', when everyone can see what has become of US 'democracy', a stifled one party-two sides bureau/corpocracy.
It is somewhat ironic that the saudis promote wahhabism/salafism with US oil money, against US and its interests.
Wow, people talk about Turkey, Israel and the US as if they were real, and not merely collectivist abstractions wrapped around PR ideologies.
Political theatre is no more realistic than "professional wresting" and its associated drama.
Meanwhile folks hang on every word of the puppets, completely ignoring their manipulator.
Why would anyone play along with this game of the elites, when it is destroying the world? Tyler?
Yea, good point. I guess its easy enough for people to end up with an overinflated sense of national (holographic) identity, and its therefore easy to see all situations as a sort of caricature of something that only exists as a vague media filtered representation of reality. Or something like that.
This is great news! The less 'allies' the US has the less unipolar this world remains. Better for us all, especially the poor and forgotten around the world.
Well, is it any surprise that the fall of NATO traitors to the Turkish people coincides with increased hostility by Western Zionist stooges? The traitors in question are the so called Deep State, Generals whose first interest is to keep Turkey as the eternal hub for gun running and Asian heroin. Curiously, these Kemalist Generals' love for Zionism and Anglo-Empire has its all too visible crypto-jewish Donmeh roots.
By alienating Turkey now, you are slashing good 5 years of the already precarious 20 year life expectancy the CIA gives Israel. So yes, Israel, infuriate the Turks, humiliate your political whores in the German Parliament and finally drag the US into an unwinnable war against Iran. Soon even Birobidzhan will deny entry to former Israelis when the upcoming Jewish refugee crisis gets going.
FYI: Dönmehhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%B6nmeh
Ergenekon - Gladiohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergenekon_%28organization%29
And to demonstrate the vast conspiracy, False Flags 'R' Us, aka as Al Qaeda, slams the Turkish government on cue. You just can't make this sh*t up.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iSGUTvSOU7mo2EuxQkfOSX...
Turkey's "ally" status was lost when they denied our access to northern Iraq.
The price should be high, it is past time for Kurdistan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxaDmAyt84g
go to this link to see the suffering of the Gazans. May the Israeli's rot in hell!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxaDmAyt84g
go to this link to see the suffering of the Gazans. May the Israeli's rot in hell!
Israel is like a Gay Pride Parade. We are here, We are Chosen, Get Used to It.
All your Bitchen get you no where, Bitchez.
Man plans, God laughs.
Please do go on.. You're not alone, angry young Turks are not just a thing of the past. Time for a change..
Seemingly unknown to the vast majority of commenteers, Jews have been present in their land for 3500 years without interruption. How long have the Anglos and Hispansics been present in America?
Before 1967, an Arab would have been insulted to be called a Palestinian, because that meant Jew! They called themselves Jordanians.
Do some due diligence that goes beyond your birth year.
"Palestine" was a waste land til the Jews started to develop it in the late 1800's, and then all the Arabs came in to get jobs like the Mexicans do now in the Southwest of America. Read Mark Twain.
Arabs do not even have a "P" sound in their language. They say "Balestine".
This is Israel 101. Look it up.
And then shut the fuck up.
--Arabs do not even have a "P" sound in their language. They say "Balestine".
That's because the Arab word for Palestine is Filasteen --pronounced with an F, as in "you're a Fucking half-educated idiot"
Go read some Zeev Sternhell and fully educate yourself:
"In fact, from the beginning, a sense of urgency gave the first Zionists the profound conviction that the task of reconquering the country had a solid moral basis. The argument of the Jews' historical right to the land was merely a matter of politics and propaganda. In view of the catastrophic situation of the Jews at the beginning of the century, the use of this argument was justified in every way, and it is all the more legitimate because of the threat of death hanging over the Jews. Historical rights were invoked to serve the need of finding a refuge."
That is an opinion, not historical accuracy. Sternhell decided to exclude my information about the Jews being indigent for 3500 years in the area. That is not a matter of propaganda but a Fact On The Ground. The Zionist movement began later than the actual re-population activities. Hertzel's Zionism was a political response to actions already in motion. It was not the impetus. The Jewish return began in 1881
The First Aliyah (also The Farmers' Aliyah) was the first modern widespread wave of Zionist aliyah. Jews who migrated to Palestine in this wave came mostly from Eastern Europe and from Yemen. This wave of aliyah began in 1881–82 and lasted until 1903.[1][2][3]–35,000[4] Jews immigrated to Ottoman Syria during the First Aliyah. While all throughout history Jews immigrated to Israel (such as the Vilna Gaon's group), these were generally smaller groups with more religious motives, and did not have a purely secular political goal in mind. An estimated 25,000
Please note this is way before ww2 or Hertzel.
Oh, by the way, falastine isn't palestine either.
Ashkenazi Jews have no genetic ties to the Mideast. Every genetic test by the Israeli government has proven this.
Ashkenazi Jews should have taken up the offer of the British government to settle in Uganda or Argentina. They will rue the day they chose to forcibly occupy Palestine and mistreat its inhabitants.
Jew is not a race. It is a religion.
Of all the barbarians that pulled down the Roman Empire, only the Arabs and Turks cling to a religion that teaches inveterate hostility against all other belief systems.
It is to the credit of modern Western civilization that we can accomodate a small portion of this poison without civil war. But more than that is toxic.
Europe is the testing ground for this thesis. Look at the results and judge with an unbiassed eye the truth. Violent conflict is increasingly common there and its source is a disaffected Islamic minority.
In societies where larger proportions of Muslims are found, as in Asia and Africa, open warfare with non-Muslims invariably ensues .
When their radical members commit atrocities their larger community is silent.
It will be the downfall of Western nations to permit an Islamic element to continue to immigrate indefinitely into the body of their liberal open societies.
So Islam is the reason for all the worlds problems? Greed, racism, manifest destiny had no part? Explain how Islam had anything to do with the hundreds of millions killed by Christians, Jews and Buddists over the last 400 years?
That is pathetic. We are talking about a particular situation and you are trying to universalize it. My Imam is Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi.
http://www.amislam.com/
He is Muslim, and he is cool.
Exactly. It is paradoxical to call for tolerance of a religion that has no tolerance.
It is a sign of cowardice, decadence, and suicidal insanity.
Liberal fascism, I suspect.
I was going to comment earlier on this post but kind of figured what most posts would focus on. However, decided to put my two cents in and probably will get junked. Everyone is focussed on the "anti-Israel" stance but I think the message has much more to do with telling Turkey to lay off their "pro-Iran" stance. Being pro-Iran (in Turkey) does not necessarily equal being anti-Israel. Turkey is a fairly secular country and at the least the middle class there do not want to live in mullah land.
I think this comment by Obama (especially coupled with Sarkozy's comments) suggest the Western powers getting their ducks lined up in a row for some type of action towards Iran.
Another little piece of propaganda so the American people won't be too shocked to find themselves in hostilities (in the past called war) with Iran.
I don't think they have the guts. If nothing happens this week, it is all shuckin' and jivin'. Iran is playing like they know this and Russia is onside.
So sorry, no nuke holocaust this year.
zen0
shut-down corner.
Booyahdoodledee
I took a doodoo and Israel came out of my ass
Friends don't let friends post drunk...or are you just normally a shithead?
Seems to me like the current regime is using the same tactics internationally as they do domestically.
They tell you how it's going to be and that's that.
Of course, Countries have options that the States do not. Countries can change alliances, Countries have armed forces and (shocker) Countries don't give a damn what US Federal judges decree or what laws Congress passes.
Of course, it could all be an act too, a way to hedge our bets in the middle east. What would be more valuable, an unwavering ally that was hated by a billion muslims or an 'ex-ally' held in high esteem by a billion muslims for 'standing up to' the Great Satan.
Just speculation.
Resources like the one you mentioned here will be very useful for me! I like to share it with all my friends and hope they will definitely like it.
virtual server hosting
windows 2008 vps hosting
mssql hosting
windows vps server