There are no Kurds in Turkey

[Azat]

Thoth, While I agree with everything you said including it being a deterrent and all that, I would like to humbly disagree with you. I still personally feel that it is just too barbaric.

In a previous life, I also use to work for the LA County Project Mgmt department where we designed the jails for LA. The max security jails are not a rosy place to be. However I would agree that min security jails are not that bad a place to be. They have lots "benefits" for the inmates.

[ThornyRose]

What I meant to say was - I can't imagine a hypoopy-crite Italy, so totally concerned for fellow human beings, sending us aid if we had decided to do the same to Syria - and not after years but a fortnight...

 

Actually, those years gave us proof of Öcalan's stuff... While the Syrian officials denied his presence on their territory, Mehmet Ali Birand interviewed him twice - once in the late eighties and once in the early nineties... LOL...

[MosJan]

Amnesty Says Torture Still Rife In Turkey

LONDON (Reuters)—

The human rights group Amnesty International accused the Turkish government on Thursday of systematically and regularly torturing its citizens, despite assurances it was cleaning up its act.

 

"Despite all declarations of intent issued by the Turkish government, we have not yet seen any signs of serious and effective measures to combat torture and the impunity that goes with it," Amnesty said in a statement.

 

Detainees in Turkey were routinely blindfolded during interrogations, and some throughout police detention, to prevent the identification of their torturers, Amnesty said.

 

Serious beatings, sexual abuse, death and rape threats, as well as sleep deprivation and electric shocks, were all common methods of torture committed against a wide variety of Turks, it added.

 

"Victims of torture include women and children and are not restricted to those suspected of crimes under anti-terrorism legislation, but also includes many people suspected of common crimes," Amnesty said.

[wh00t]

MosJan, I was just about to post that.

[MJ]

Thorny,

 

My reply to you is below:

 

MJ, I am not convinced that it is Osama. I see little wrong in retaliation. However, I think that you may be punishing the wrong people in the first place, undesirable though they are.

Well, I am convinced, and I don’t think that we are pushing the wrong people. The evidence is sufficient. While you are welcome to divulge in intellectual exercises, I will give my government my mandate to take all necessary measures to protect the lives of my family members and all other people targeted by the extremists. Ussama may have been enjoying the current campaign initially, but rest assured. He is already changing his mind – his latest video-interview being the first evidence. And if you think that Usama is the mastermind, and we/Americans here are the McDonnald eating hicks, I should say that never underestimate America (much like Russia). This is a powerful nation with enormous and unmatched intellectual and other resources. And to your rhetoric question, “Are we stupid,” I would answer don’t be tempted to think that we are stupid here, that we are any less informed about the world affairs than “you out there,” or that our national morality is on a lower level that anybody else’s out there. In fact, anybody who knows the American nation closely, would know that we are one of the few nations in the world holding the highest moral grounds.

And I can give you one explanation where does the current [European] anti-American hysteria come from. What is emerging in the world in the last decade or so is the European Union, which is positioning itself at entering the world markets more aggressively, and competing with the US. However, given the rapid growth of the US economy, its better positioning due to historical and socio-economical reasons, given the rapid and unparalleled growth of the US economy, the economy of China, the dominance of the US $, Europe is finding itself in a tough position to compete. Europe does everything it can to curb the US economic influence and to lessen its competitiveness. One example is the absurd of all – the Kyoto Treaty – hit the nerve of the economy, which is the energy infrastructure of a country, especially that it is already in a crisis. If needed, I can allude further on the subject.

The bottom line is that, as always in history, the world is divided between the “haves” and the “have nots.” We happen to be among the “haves.” The “have nots” have two alternatives:

1. To become “haves;”

2. To make the “haves” to become “have nots.”

The first option is not readily attainable in Europe. It requires change of culture. Changing cultures is incredibly difficult, if not impossible. The second option is well practiced effective the French Revolution, through the Russian Revolution, and on. It has produced results easier than the first option, i.e. the “equal distribution of poverty” is much easier to achieve than the “equal distribution of wealth.” One has to take into consideration also another factor. In the last 30 years or so, there has been a tremendous shift and change of mentality of representatives of media due to generational transition, if nothing else. The world media (including that of the US) has ended up in the hands of the left wing. Needless to say that the media is a powerful source of information and misinformation. Now, how does this happen? First, it starts at the university level. Even in the US, where you have the highest paying universities in the world, the people who assess themselves having the potential of becoming the “haves” or already being the “haves” have no incentive to become university professors. The pay is lousy. And in country where a smart person may have enormous opportunities to become a “have” outside academia, the academia is being taken over by those, who don’t have the aspiration to become a “have” for a variety of reasons (one of the reasons being their very low risk-reward utility). So, what do you have? Throughout a 30 or so years period of time, you have a left wing mentality take over academia. What happens next? Next, the students start arriving. They are young, and they haven’t decided yet where would they want to be in life as far as the “haves” vs. “not haves” are concerned. Many of them think that that is not their priority in their lives. And for the time being they are right. So, the first “officially smart person” they get exposed to in their lives is ultra-left leaning professor, whose mere existence has become possible due to public funds. He is a tenure professor, meaning he cannot be laid off, he earns miserable income by the standards of the Western world, his free speech is protected by the First Amendment of the constitution, and being negative and nihilistic has become his way of self-expression and self-assertion. And guess what, who else is a better target than the government and its power structures. But more importantly, who is the most hated target? The corporations. Because this is where the “haves” are. More insultingly, this is where his smart students go, who immediately get somewhat like 2-3 times his salary as entry level salaries. So, what do the students get from him? Free ticket to pass through the brainwashing machine for 4-8 years. The machine “exposes” them to the “Elvis is Alive” conspiracy theories, the theory of “corporate greed,” the “corporate interests,” the “environmental crimes,” “campaign finance reform,” and similar garbage. You get the pattern. So the student has two choices – to buy in or to not buy in into this. By now, you know where am I headed. This should be enough for now, I assume.

Now about Armenia and PKK. While I understand your point, I would like to say that we can take any healthy argument or concept in the world, and turn it into a grotesque. Want to try?

About America supporting Saudi Arabia, oppressing 51% of its population. To a degree you are right. And there are many such examples. But there is an elementary reasoning behind it, and I am surprised that you don’t see it. If the US was supporting the oppressive Saudi regime against their progressive and democratic opposition, your grievance would have been more than legitimate. But the alternative is either to support this regime or its opposition. Which one is the lest evil you think? You may say none, and the Saudi Arabia has to be boycotted completely. OK. But what are implications? First, the hundreds of billions of dollars of investments of the western world over the last hundred years get expropriated. And Saudi Arabia nor any other oil/gas producing country could’ve not possibly become a producer without the Gulbenkian’s and the Rockefellers of the world. So first we make them potent to produce the earth resources that by an irony if history are under their control, then they starve us to slavery, by issuing “Fatwa,” for example. Great alternative right? But it has to be seen not just in the context of Saudi Arabia. How about Iraq? How about Iran? What about Turkey, after all? We support the Turkish state, even though it is one of the most oppressive regimes, right? Why? What is the alternative? Either we support the current regime, which represents the rightist military, or we support the Islamic Fundamentalists? Which one is a better choice? It is a matter of one’s judgment, right? We cannot be neutral, or to boycott Turkey, right? Because then, Turkey would look for other alternatives in the opposite pole – after all this is the game Turkey has always played brilliantly throughout its history, and this is the primary mechanism behind its domination on the territory of the Ottoman Empire. Who suffers eventually, if we don’t support Turkey, Saudi Arabia, etc? To me the conclusion is evident. I wish I had the energy and time to e more detailed and systematic. But I would spare it for now for more enjoyable engagements around the family dinner table.

To recap my primary point about one of your main questions, the current anti-American hysteria is a European Union driven and serving political prostitution.

[MJ]

I just noticed that I started talking about academia being the cradle of worldwide leftism, and forgot to transit to media.

So where the journalists come from? From the academia. It is known in advance that the media related jobs (outside the entertainment industry) are also lousy jobs in terms of the salaries. Who goes to accept these jobs? Thos, who also for variety of reasons don’t have the incentive to become “haves.” In other words, the media is the extension of academia. So “haves” don’t go there, because they go after more rewarding endeavors, and in the result, the entire media and academia is being taken over by the “have nots” in some 30 year period. So what is going to be the outcome – pounding the “haves” day and night. What is going to be the outcome? For example, someone with education in literature, history, social sciences or education, who has never had the mindset to read and analyze scientific or economic data, is going to pound day and night, “The sky is falling. The undisputed Global Warming of the bankrupt capitalistic western civilization has sustain unparalleled catastrophic collusion with the greedy and inhumane corporate interests, while they were contaminating the atmosphere with industrial waist.” And who is the best target if not the US?

 

I am sure, you get this picture, too.

[Juggernaut]

quote

There is no shred of doubt that Bin Laden was behind the actions

 

Why doesnt the US government tell the public, so that the whole world knows? I mean its not as if your government has never lied before.

 

quote

Please tell me what do you see stupid in our retaliation

 

The US should look internally for its answer, not bomb an allready straving people to oblivion.

 

quote

and wohat would you consider proof

 

Certainly not the word of the US government.

 

"I did not have sex with that woman, Ms Lewinsky"

 

[ November 09, 2001: Message edited by: Juggernaut ]

 

[ November 09, 2001: Message edited by: Juggernaut ]

[Azat]

quote

Why doesnt the US government tell the public, so that the whole world knows? I mean its not as if your government has never lied before.

Because it does not have to.

Because it is possible that by telling the public these terrorists will find out how it was learner that it was Osama and how to stop those leaks.

Nobody says that our government or your government have never lied before.

 

 

quote

The US should look internally for its answer, not bomb an allready straving people to oblivion.

You are starting to sound like a "Victicrat". You pretend to be the victim of all US policies. Blame the US for everything. Next you are going to blame for the Sun coming up from the East and going down on the West.

 

quote

Certainly not the word of the US government.

That's right you only believe things that USSR use to put out. I forgot.

[Juggernaut]

quote

Because it does not have to.

 

Indeed it does not, never mind the fact that over 1 billion people (the Muslim world) are demanding some sort of proof. I think their support would be much more valued than the alleged American spies.

 

quote

Blame the US for everything.

 

I dont blame everything on the US, just what happened on September 11.

 

quote

That's right you only believe things that USSR use to put out.

 

Unfortunatelly I did not have a chance to assess the media in the USSR, because I was 10 when the whole thing collapsed (partly thanks to US sanctions, btw). And now your fellow Armenians are rellying on outside aid to keep the economy going... Sure we have our 'freedom', but you should go and ask people in Armenia whether it is worth it.

[Azat]

quote

Indeed it does not, never mind the fact that over 1 billion people (the Muslim world) are demanding some sort of proof. I think their support would be much more valued than the alleged American spies.

The leaders who need to know do know.

 

quote

I dont blame everything on the US, just what happened on September 11.

I am dumfounded. I do not know what to say? I can only say that I, plus 270 million Americans, plus billions around the world, plus majority of foreign leaders disagree with you opinion.

 

US foreign policy is like a Swiss cheese with all kinds of holes through it and how they have been handling the Israeli and Palestine situation is not admirable, but that is not an excuse to commit the authorities that were committed against it.

 

quote

...whole thing collapsed (partly thanks to US sanctions, btw)...

And partially because of their war in Afghanistan. Within a short time of their defeat, Hungry and Czechoslovakia realized that Soviet power had weakened and they departed followed by the republics.

 

quote

And now your fellow Armenians are rellying on outside aid to keep the economy going... Sure we have our 'freedom', but you should go and ask people in Armenia whether it is worth it.

I personally feel that it is a good thing, but I have relatives there who feel the pain on their own skin everyday and I understand the issue from their point of view as well.

[THOTH]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:



Thorny,

There is no shred of doubt that Bin Laden was behind the actions (not the first one, by the way). (I know it for sure. It is proven. There is a Ceritficate of Proof signed by Yassir Arafat. )

About 85% of the American population (according to the polls), including my whole family, supports the operation. If I was conscripted to the American Army, I would've not hesitated for a moment to come at Al-Qaida and Taliban with all the power available - the sole purpose being total eradication.

Please tell me what do you see stupid in our retaliation, and wohat would you consider proof.

---

Thorny - basically I have to agree with MJ and Azat on this one. there can be no doubt concerning the guilt of Bin Laden/Al Queda. Equally so there is no doubt concerning the relationship between Bin Laden and Taliban. It is certainly within our rights to strike back. Additionally, Taliban is an entity that has been commiting grave abuses in Afghanistan and any decent, intelligent person should be all in favor of their removal. This of course does not mean that the US should necessarily be the judge/jury and executioner - but if so and if supported/allied with/by indigenous and neighboring elements - so much the better. Of course we should be concerned regarding the doability and pitfalls of such an operation - and personanally I would suspend it for a bit at this time. (for a variety of reasons). I'm sorry if you (and much of the world) resents the US power position in the world today and sees us as some kind of unknowing giant buffoons stomping about around the world. Obviously our leaders often lead to these perceptions in the manner they come accross - etc - but let me assure you - there are many very smart and informed folks here - making decisions based on thourghough analysis and good intentions - are they perfect - or all informed - etc - no - but this is an impossibility. Are they sensitive to the (very many) issues surounding a campaign of this sort and of our relations with other nations and among nations in the region and the world - I think so - for the most part. Is what the US is doing in Afghanistan still foolhardy and doomed to fail - perhaps it is. We shall see I guess. Amnd its certainly OK to be a critic - and I undeerstand (and smpathize with) many of objections to the US (and allied) action occuring today (and have been hoping really hard since it was first contemplated that they can avoid obvious and not so pitfalls and errors - reral/PR and otherwise...) - just the same - don't think that the US is pursuing this campaign in a totally naive fashion - it is not.

[ November 09, 2001: Message edited by: THOTH ]

[THOTH]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Azat:


Thoth, I personally am against "cruel and unusual punishment". I am against the death penalty because I really feel that it does not accomplish much. There are statistics on both sited of the issue that show that it works/it fails, but I just think that it is inhumane.

For instance, I feel the death of Timothy McVeigh is not going to stop the fundamentalists in US from committing crimes. US is not any safer not that McVeigh was killed. Plus it costs SO much more to kill someone than to incarcerate them for life. And when a "McVeigh" is put to death he becomes a hero for others, but behind the bars over time he is just another criminal. This is also why I hope they catch Bin Laden alive.

Just my opinion...

---

I do not disagree. I am generally opposed to the death penalty because of the complcating factors that draw out the process when it comes to putting someone to death. I am also aware of the racial biases and errors. I agree that the death penalty has little deterrent effect - no one believes it as a real threat. My idea is for more severe punishments for (certain violent and major impact) crimes - rather then just locking people up - with TV/VCR/library/gym & (near) comforts of home etc. I think that if offenders who use pre-meditatedx violence against other humans would be (essentially) tortured as part of their sentence - or would be made to suffer equivelent to the suffering inflicted on others - and this was publisized - I think this could have a deterrrent effect. (as well as satisfy demands for victim retribution). I also think that the corporate criminals and other big wig white collar criminals should be made to suffer such when they defraud and affect other folks with their greedy actions. Again - I think that if (severe and repeated) physical punishment were a potential sentence - this would act as a deterrent - and be well deserved - IMO.

[ThornyRose]

MJ, I AM aware of the “oil factor.” Your point about Turkey also being supported despite its record is correct; however, Turkey IS under pressure, both from the U.S. and from Europe, to reform. Can this be said of the Saudis? (And I am not right only to a degree. Just because they do not torture [don’t they?] doesn’t give them leave to make women live the way they do, although they poop on toilets with golden rims.) No. Albright just lightly touches on it in one visit there, and that’s it. What would happen if the U.S. “cared” as much for the women as it does for the people (perhaps especially the Kurds) of Turkey (does it)? Would the Saudis raise oil prices? “Not the women, not the oil.” Is Turkey the lesser two of the allies? Why do we find Rouben Malayan’s hiding behind his cause to act like a total dweeb and having the audacity to call me a barbarian because I asked him questions he couldn’t answer, abhorrent?

My point (with the above and previous comments) is that there is no room for “morality talk,” so it shouldn’t be mentioned. Nothing about “good intentions,” and nothing about removing the Taliban because of their grave abuses – does Iran have to send a bomb-filled plane into a building in the U.S. to have the U.S. finally remember that there is a disgusting regime there (alongside the fact that it has sent a pack of suicidals)? The “good intentions” bit for what his government does is for the commoner to find excuses for what he cannot explain. That person is easily lulled when some speaker goes up and talks about supporting a regime because of benefit but also when the same person goes up and talks about opposing a regime because of moral whatever. Somehow I never get the impression that it is spelled to be the other way around, that is, supporting out of moral concerns and opposing because of benefit. Now, whatever the heck happened to the good intentions? Somehow they just don’t fit in anymore.

Now for your mandate to your government to protect you and your family while I put myself through some intellectual exercise – really, are they protecting you this way? By bombing/punishing Afghanistan? Does it really prevent any further of the same? Is this really your last resort after years of trying to find other venues? I’m not sure years of sanctions against Afghanistan count.

And I am not at all happy with the way they are carrying out their stuff. The conception of the operation and the actual execution are two different things, but I’m thinking that they were perhaps a bit too hasty – and the conception flawed.

Punishing the government that has ordered the attacks or harbours the culprit is your right (and perhaps not RETALIATION per se, come to think of it – which would mean just doing the equal in the opposite direction, no, as there is an element of revenge?). But whom are you punishing and how? These flaws (hitting the wrong targets) are really too much for me who cannot accept the “there are going to be civilian casualties but that’s the heavy price of war,” etc., besides the fact that I am not tried to be convinced that it is Osama anyway – I just have to take someone’s word. I cannot accept that one more Afghani civilian has to die because of the 5000+ American deaths or because Americans feel comfortable and safe if Afghanistan is bombed. I never felt I would be safe to go to the East when, a few years ago, Turkey threatened to declare war on Syria (perhaps because of the distance, too?). What “mistakes” they were already making in Northern Iraq, killing civilians, were enough, and now there was Syria next in line (but after years of trying other venues). Great. Good thing the Syrians were wise and kicked Öcalan out... Which reminds me... Why did not the Taliban hand over Osama? Could it be more than about Osama being “the one to hand over the Taliban government”? I just don’t get the impression that the U.S. could have (not “has”) done enough to minimize civilian casualties under these circumstances. Now THAT should be unacceptable by all. This doesn’t mean that, now, once it has started, it should be or can be called off... But why was it given the green light like this, then?

 

The “grotesque” part – I haven’t distorted anything. The case of Armenia and the PKK, in which it was proven that there is no such connection (I think), is not like with Syria and Greece in which Turkey informed many other governments of the role they played in rearing the PKK and in which Turkey provided the evidence (or rather added an element of official assurance to things already on the newspapers for a long, long time) – but nobody heeded the stuff. Again, because it is not moral but totally out of benefit, I would have a heart-attack if Italy SENT troops to help Turkey (makes all the difference in the world whether it is Turkey or the U.S., doesn’t it?). And if you’re all saying, “Yeah, nothing new about that,” then why is there all this “O our allies and O the delight of our eyes – how they have come to help us!” masturbation all over the place as well as all those speeches in parliaments about the sacrosanct nature of this “help”? Something is awfully wrong all over, isn’t it? Or is this just not the time to pinpoint the world’s wrongs?

 

MJ, I haven’t been able to follow what you wanted to say with the “haves and have-nots” as far as universities and media are concerned. I wasn’t sure if you meant all the world or just the U.S. (judging from your mention of the First Amendment, Elvis is alive stuff, etc. – I wasn’t sure which direction to turn to after the “even in the U.S.”).

 

CIA and its having to hide certain facts to prevent the stopping of leaks – I don’t know. That (and the conclusions reached via the “evidence”) just seems too classical and not at all convincing when it was the same CIA that counted/named corpses that were actually not supposed to be dead but were alive and well in the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere. Or was it just a game to fool some people, to give the impression that the CIA was on the wrong track? I can be accused of stuck there – but I don’t trust the CIA because of these events. I have no other choice than to accept what they say they will do, perhaps, but then what good am I?

 

The morality of the American people – what good is it if everyone including themselves knows that most Americans are America-centred and few follow up or try to understand world affairs (perhaps coupled with the media as you characterize it, except for this event with the 85% ratio [which implies I perhaps have a slight idea as to what MJ was trying to say?])?

 

As for Juggernaut’s “it’s America’s fault that it got attacked on Sept. 11” – that is BS. It is the sick-in-the-headedness of the mastermind that has been able to kill thousands of innocent people in one move that is the fault here – not the U.S.’s (see, that mastermind hasn’t been able to think the way I do – that a death of one of yours doesn’t mean there can be another death, from among yours or the other’s, and, unlike what the U.S. claims, this move was not in self-defense, either; so why give him allowance, Jug?). It is like trying to say that Özdemir Sabancı deserved to be killed because he was a big-time money-making businessman and Fehriye Erdal the good-for-nothing leftist just couldn’t take that or it didn’t suit her ideology – and Belgium is OK to be so gaa-gaa for this “freedom-fighter.”

[MJ]

MJ, I AM aware of the “oil factor.”

 

I know. But this is not just about oil. It is also about the geopolitics and the potential regroupings of countries. That is what I was hinting at by putting Saudis, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, etc, in one category.

 

 

Your point about Turkey also being supported despite its record is correct; however, Turkey IS under pressure, both from the U.S. and from Europe, to reform. Can this be said of the Saudis? (And I am not right only to a degree. Just because they do not torture [don’t they?] doesn’t give them leave to make women live the way they do, although they poop on toilets with golden rims.) No. Albright just lightly touches on it in one visit there, and that’s it. What would happen if the U.S. “cared” as much for the women as it does for the people (perhaps especially the Kurds) of Turkey (does it)? Would the Saudis raise oil prices?

 

The reason is elementary again. With Turkey there is a chance that it may improve its Human Rights’ and other record due to the secularist character of its governance. With Saudi Arabia and the like there is no chance whatsoever that it will happen anytime in this century. Additionally, if pressure is brought on the current Saudi regime, which is the less of the two evils, and it yields, it will lose the control over the country, and the “worse” guys will take over. The same concerns Turkey to a less degree. If pressured too much, and transforming to much, we may have elements worse than the current regime controlling it. That’s why we dance with Turkey, and don’t recognize the Armenian Genocide, for example. In two words, we do this becasue of Turkey's blckmail - "if you don't support us [Turkey], we will align with Iraq, Iran, Saida Arabia, bluh bluh bluh."

 

 

My point (with the above and previous comments) is that there is no room for “morality talk,” so it shouldn’t be mentioned. Nothing about “good intentions,” and nothing about removing the Taliban because of their grave abuses – does Iran have to send a bomb-filled plane into a building in the U.S. to have the U.S. finally remember that there is a disgusting regime there (alongside the fact that it has sent a pack of suicidals)? The “good intentions” bit for what his government does is for the commoner to find excuses for what he cannot explain. That person is easily lulled when some speaker goes up and talks about supporting a regime because of benefit but also when the same person goes up and talks about opposing a regime because of moral whatever. Somehow I never get the impression that it is spelled to be the other way around, that is, supporting out of moral concerns and opposing because of benefit. Now, whatever the heck happened to the good intentions? Somehow they just don’t fit in anymore.

 

I think you are totally misinformed (given my arguments about the “haves” and “have nots” and the media, it is not surprising). We are not removing Taliban for their grave abuses. We have never recognized them as a legitimate government. We give a limited support to their opposition in this military campaign, though we don’t think that the opposition is much better. We are not there to change their culture. We cannot do it. Additionally, we are not bombing Afghanistan. We are dropping food in Afghanistan. What we are bombing is the Taliban military installations, i.e. their radar installations, their ammunition warehouses, their anti-air systems, the terrorist camps, their hideout caves, and as of lately, their troops. Unfortunately there have been some civilian collateral casualties (2-3 dozen, I presume), though the number of these casualties is grossly inflated by the left wing media. These casualties are unfortunate events. But on the scale of the operations we are in, it is expected. And for the scale of the operations, our record of the collateral casualties is quite impressive. We are not in retaliation business. We are in prevention business there. We are destroying the regime, which openly harbors and cultivates international terrorism, and refuse to hand over the well recognized terrorists, which allocates all the logistic and other means for training terrorists, etc. We are achieving great results. The snakes have crawled back into their holes, their communication is disrupted, their ability of exercising further terror is hampered, their leaders are being eliminated, their financial sources are being dried up, they are on the run, they are being arrested, and it has just started. This is only the first phase of operations. Have a patience, and you will see the rest.

 

Now for your mandate to your government to protect you and your family while I put myself through some intellectual exercise – really, are they protecting you this way? By bombing/punishing Afghanistan? Does it really prevent any further of the same? Is this really your last resort after years of trying to find other venues? I’m not sure years of sanctions against Afghanistan count. And I am not at all happy with the way they are carrying out their stuff. The conception of the operation and the actual execution are two different things, but I’m thinking that they were perhaps a bit too hasty – and the conception flawed.

 

Yes, it does protect me from further terrorist actions, even though it doesn’t exclude them. But if it doesn’t resolve all the outstanding issues, it doesn’t mean that we should not resolve what we can resolve this way. I think the operation is very well thought out, it is being executed extremely well, except a couple of mistakes with the Red Cross facilities, for example. And if there is anybody in the world who can execute successfully such operations, it is us(short of Israel on a smaller scale).

You are grossly exaggerating our “hitting of wrong targets.” Except the couple of mistakes we have made, the operation is being carried with surgical precision. The Afghan flaw of refugees is nothing new. Millions of Afghans have been living in refugee camps in Iran and Pakistan, and they continue arriving (true – at some accelerating rates). We provide them with food, medicine and other support. We couldn’t even provide them such support when they where in their original places of residence. After the war is over, we will help them to settle back, and will help them to build Afghanistan – rest assured. Now it is war, and we are after their oppressors – the source of their misery. And again, the allegations of Afghan civilian deaths outside the 2-3 dozens (or comparable amount) of debts is pure misinformation spread by the Taliban regime (which is understandable – the propaganda is part of the wars), and supported by some scoundrel reporters (and that many of the reporters worldwide are pure scoundrels I have no doubt of it, there is enough evidence for it, including those that have reported that Americans have used chemical weapons in Vietnam – that CNN guy has been fired for spreading lies). And if you, Thorny, think that you are the only person who is concerned about the civilians, and all we here are revenge thirsty carnivores, I would just say that when you become 31 (I might’ve also been like you in my 21), perhaps there may be some moderation in your thoughts and declarations (though some 31s that we know here are still not moderated ).

 

 

I never felt I would be safe to go to the East when, a few years ago, Turkey threatened to declare war on Syria (perhaps because of the distance, too?). What “mistakes” they were already making in Northern Iraq, killing civilians, were enough, and now there was Syria next in line (but after years of trying other venues). Great. Good thing the Syrians were wise and kicked Öcalan out... Which reminds me... Why did not the Taliban hand over Osama? Could it be more than about Osama being “the one to hand over the Taliban government”? I just don’t get the impression that the U.S. could have (not “has” done enough to minimize civilian casualties under these circumstances. Now THAT should be unacceptable by all. This doesn’t mean that, now, once it has started, it should be or can be called off... But why was it given the green light like this, then?

 

I am not going to address the issue of civilian casualties, again. I have been clear about them. I would say that there is a huge difference between Syria and Afghanistan. First, Syria handed over Ocalan not because it wanted to do so. If it would’ve enjoyed the same support of USSR that it used to, the PKK camps would’ve still been station in Syria, and there would’ve been zilch that Turkey would’ve achieved along those lines. So let’s give the “credit” where it is due. Additionally, Usama virtually owns the Afghan Governement. His personal money and the money raised in his name is what runs the Taliban government, and it has always been so. All the communication and other infrastructures of Taliban are controlled by Al-Qaida.

 

The “grotesque” part – I haven’t distorted anything. The case of Armenia and the PKK, in which it was proven that there is no such connection (I think), is not like with Syria and Greece in which Turkey informed many other governments of the role they played in rearing the PKK and in which Turkey provided the evidence (or rather added an element of official assurance to things already on the newspapers for a long, long time) – but nobody heeded the stuff. Again, because it is not moral but totally out of benefit, I would have a heart-attack if Italy SENT troops to help Turkey (makes all the difference in the world whether it is Turkey or the U.S., doesn’t it?). And if you’re all saying, “Yeah, nothing new about that,” then why is there all this “O our allies and O the delight of our eyes – how they have come to help us!” masturbation all over the place as well as all those speeches in parliaments about the sacrosanct nature of this “help”? Something is awfully wrong all over, isn’t it? Or is this just not the time to pinpoint the world’s wrongs?

By talking about grotesque, I didn’t mean that the PKK’s affiliation with Armenia is not grotesque. I know that that grotesque is cultivated by certain circles in Turkey, and it has not been taken serious by the government. What I meant was we can take any normal topic/subject, apply a little creativity, and would be able to make such grotesque from it, and make it look like “truth.” All I am saying is let’s apply common sense.

 

MJ, I haven’t been able to follow what you wanted to say with the “haves and have-nots” as far as universities and media are concerned. I wasn’t sure if you meant all the world or just the U.S. (judging from your mention of the First Amendment, Elvis is alive stuff, etc. – I wasn’t sure which direction to turn to after the “even in the U.S.” .

 

I meant the entire world – the US, UK, France (very much so), the “FarFarAwayistan,” , Sweden, etc – you name it. Each of these countries has its analog of First Amendment and Elvis story.

 

 

CIA and its having to hide certain facts to prevent the stopping of leaks – I don’t know. That (and the conclusions reached via the “evidence” just seems too classical and not at all convincing when it was the same CIA that counted/named corpses that were actually not supposed to be dead but were alive and well in the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere. Or was it just a game to fool some people, to give the impression that the CIA was on the wrong track? I can be accused of stuck there – but I don’t trust the CIA because of these events. I have no other choice than to accept what they say they will do, perhaps, but then what good am I?

 

CIA is not hiding facts, here. CIA has no mission/obligation to report facts to you/us. CIA reports to the President and the Congress of the US. And it has done so. It also has a practice of sharing/receiving information with other intelligence agencies of other countries, which also unequivocally point at Al-Qaida as the mastermind of the terrorist actions. Additionally, the operatives of Al-Quida are being detained in Germany, UK and elsewhere – where ever they may be. The entire civilized world is after them. It is not just CIA or the US.

The morality of the American people – what good is it if everyone including themselves knows that most Americans are America-centred and few follow up or try to understand world affairs (perhaps coupled with the media as you characterize it, except for this event with the 85% ratio [which implies I perhaps have a slight idea as to what MJ was trying to say?])?

Where should the Americans be centered at? At Turkey? Armenia? France? Of coarse they are America centered. Aren’t you Turkey centered? If you are trying to say that most of the Americans don’t know much about other countries or nations, you may be right. But who cares? The government knows what needs to be known. And it knows more than any other government does. How do you know that only few follow or understand these operations? Where do you take this information from? Why such generalizations from Thorny? I meet a lot of people on a daily basis. I go with different people for dinner almost every evening of the week. I talk to people around, and exchange views, etc. I see overwhelming interest/concern, I see overwhelming desire to understand the core of the problem, I see the matter being publicized on a non-stop basis, I see people being very thoughtful, truthful, honest. Where do you get your such impressions from?

 

As for Juggernaut’s “it’s America’s fault that it got attacked on Sept. 11” – that is BS. It is the sick-in-the-headedness of the mastermind that has been able to kill thousands of innocent people in one move that is the fault here – not the U.S.’s (see, that mastermind hasn’t been able to think the way I do – that a death of one of yours doesn’t mean there can be another death, from among yours or the other’s, and, unlike what the U.S. claims, this move was not in self-defense, either; so why give him allowance, Jug?). It is like trying to say that Özdemir Sabancı deserved to be killed because he was a big-time money-making businessman and Fehriye Erdal the good-for-nothing leftist just couldn’t take that or it didn’t suit her ideology – and Belgium is OK to be so gaa-gaa for this “freedom-fighter.”

 

As to “Jabbernuts,” if you had not misspelled his name, you would’ve understood him well.

 

[ November 10, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[THOTH]

MJ -

 

well well - while I agree with the jist of your last few posts (concerning USA, Russia, Taliban, etc) and nearly all you say (to a degree) - I also must say that you seem to me just as the left wing conspiracy theorists that you deride - but just in the opposite camp. Your discussion of and concept of left and right (in the media and academia) while certainly with much truth - still strike me as oan overly simplistic (and somewhat paranoid) assessment. Also - shouldn't we consider that most all media enterprises are owned by some very big media conglomerats - all with buko corporate ties. Thes companies (and their related advertisers) seem to me to be very conservative - and in fact arguments can be very successfully made of a bias in media to the right (and of stories not told or told with a slant that is not in any way leftward) - sure what you say concerning journalists might very well be true - but also consider that the Dan Rathers of the world - etc - are very rich men (not poor starving lefty reporters) - and they often have a great deal of editorial control as well (and similar situation exists in Academia - as well as corporate sponsership and many factors that influence a very conservative approach) - I'm not denying the factors/forces that you allude to - but there is the other side as well - you diatribe on this subjuct seems, well, a bit Rushed to me - if you get my drift (as in Limbagh)....(otherwise good posts - BTW...LOL)

[MJ]

No, Thoth. I am not a conspiracy theorist – be it left or right. But I know the academia too well. Your assessment of media is inaccurate, I think. For example, the CNN has been established and owned by Ted Turner – an ultra-leftist. CNBS, NBS, ABC, MSNBC or pretty much every media conglomerate is controlled by (and driven by ratings – read money) the left wing as far as the content of the programs is concerned. If they seem to you to be rather conservative, that tells me only where you are.

 

The exception is FOX, which has right-of-the-center editorial board (pretty common sense, in my view with their Managing Editor Brit Hume). Your qualification of the media conglomerates as conservative seem to me totally out of reality. Even Fox, being relatively conservative, still doesn’t qualify being labeled “conservative.”

 

And I have not said that rich people (Ted Turner being an example, again, cannot be leftists). After all, Engels (Marx-Engels spelling ?) himself was a rich person. For God’s sake, Ted Kennedy is a “filthy” rich person.

 

While corporations may or may not be headed by relatively conservative individuals on the very top level (a great number of them is leftist), that is not necessarily true of their policies nor about their middle level managements. Corporations are in both sides of the fence.

 

However, let me reiterate again: I am not advocating leftist conspiracy theory. I am not saying it is conspiracy. It is a natural phenomenon in terms of academia being a cradle of leftism, and thus “mass producing” leftist journalists, because the alternative orientation in academia is totally absent due to lack of incentives.

 

As to Lame Rushbough, now tell me about being “rushed.”

 

Another elaboration: when speaking about the leftism in academia, I mean certain areas, such us the Journalism Departments, first of all, Social Sciences Departments, Education Departments, Political Science Departments (the latest on a selective basis –University of Chicago, for example), History Departments, Literature Departments, Mathematics Department, etc. Now, if you go to Business Schools, you may find both – slightly more tilted towards the right (just slightly), same about the Medical Schools, the Engineering Schools, etc. The corporate sponsorship of universities is heavily tilted at Medical Schools, Engineering Schools, and perhaps Business Schools.

 

As to the other side… as much as I can trace my presence in this forum, and the proportion of people in this forum in terms of very left vs. slightly right, it is heavily tilted towards the left, and the other side has been heavily been represented. So, I guess I don’t understand. But if you want to allude “the other side of the story,” go right ahead… I’ll be here.

[Azat]

American Media is as leftist as it can be. The leader of the big networks is CNN(Clinton News Network) followed by MSNBC and CNBC.

 

NBC, ABC, CBS are a little closer to the center, but are still to the left. FOX is on the right but only because there is money to be made in the right because of the gap that the other networks have left.

 

Just for the record, Fox is trying to get closer to the center by hiring Geraldo Rivera recently and CNN just made an offer to Rush recently prior to his announcement of going deaf to get a little conservative.

 

 

I do agree that we should move the unrelated maretial over

[khodja]

Winston,

 

Thank you for your balanced approach. MJ and Azat are coming through loud and clear. Did they just come from a Rush lovefest?

[MJ]

There is a non-Aremnein word popular in such cases in Armenia - khiyar (pre-reincarnational).

[Azat]

Hey Duffus,
Why don't you spend an hour or two and read my posts and you will realize that I am a life long Democrat.

BTW: Rush was wondering where his Victicrats friend khodja was at?

[khodja]

Azat,

 

Political labels can be misleading. Before I became a Democrat, I was a Republican and member of the Ripon Society, a centrist Republican organization. If you think that the major media are leftist and that Fox channel is fair and unbiased, then maybe you will realize as I did that you are in the wronng party.

[Azat]

I think that you should reread my post and point me to the part of me post where I said that Fox was fair and unbiased. Maybe you should read posts prior to just putting a "clever" reply.

[MJ]

I would propose to move the materials not related to the Kurds in Turkey to another thread. What do you say?

[aurguplu]

mj,

does "khiyar" mean "cucumber" in armenian, and "an idiot" by extension?

just curious.

regards,

ali suat

[MJ]

Ali,

Indeed, "khiyar" is in use in Armenia as a vulgarized substitute for cucumber. It is not an Armenian word - I don't know if it is Turkish, Arabic or Persian. I am not sure that it refers exactly to "idiot" or something similar, though in this particular case that may be inferred, too.

[ November 12, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]