Islamists dominate Egypt
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: Post-Classical Middle East
Forum Discription: SW Asia, the Middle East and Islamic civilizations from 600s - 1900 AD
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=30975
Printed Date: 28-Apr-2024 at 17:03
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Islamists dominate Egypt
Posted By: Nick1986
Subject: Islamists dominate Egypt
Date Posted: 12-Jan-2012 at 19:31
|
Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood are currently leading in the elections, with over 50% of the vote. Is this a pattern of things to come as the dictators of yesterday are replaced by newer models? http://www.aljazeera.com/video/middleeast/2012/01/201211263012604927.html - Link ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Replies:
Posted By: eurokiller
Date Posted: 16-Feb-2012 at 01:55
|
You mad because Muslims are choosing Islam instead of imperialistic euro ideologies? |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 16-Feb-2012 at 02:20
|
Any religion can be used for imperialistic ideologies, and they were, all of them, repeatedly, over and over. What do you think made the Turks go in Europe and conquer the Balkans, and forced thousands of people to convert to Islam with knifes on their necks? Imperialism, Islamic version. In the same way a secular ideology can be imperialistic too; but at least in a secular society there is something above the subjective decisions of people for their own usage, and possible religious fanaticism that brings nothing but problems - the law, that is equal for everyone. There is nothing less-working than a theocracy, this is proven many times with different religions. secularism is not perfect, but it's a better bet than any religiously based government, or any religion. ------------- |
Posted By: Baal Melqart
Date Posted: 16-Feb-2012 at 06:55
Well said my friend. To further prove to Eurokiller that Egypt is going down the drain here is a nice video that really speaks a thousand words! [TUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prQtaJI_1R8&feature=channel_video_title[/TUBE] You expect these people to rule using religion and bring about change and democracy???? ------------- Timidi mater non flet |
Posted By: Arab
Date Posted: 16-Feb-2012 at 08:11
im·pe·ri·al·ism/imˈpi(ə)rēəˌlizəm/
It is certainly not a phenomenon confined to Europe only. ------------- "Prayer is when you talk to God. Insanity is when you talk to God and he answers back." |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 16-Feb-2012 at 13:18
I concur with Arab. Yepper...Islam was doing that 14 centuries ago from it's inception... and it started in the geo-physical area we now term the Middle East. And not by a European. And one can make the arguement that it was... became... and still is... an imperialistic ideaology now and at various points in it's history... by varying factions of it's adherents. Don't see that.... then one is blind, a supporter, deluisonal or historically inept.  I leave it to the individual to put on the appropriate pair of sababîT or kenêdir. ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: Baal Melqart
Date Posted: 16-Feb-2012 at 14:21
I could write thousands of lines on how the essence of Islam was transformed into a 'political religion' by the Rashiddun, Omayyad and Abbasid caliphates. Basically, after the death of the Muhammad many factions vied for political control and soon these 'khalifas' figured out that indoctrinating Muslims with the idea of a caliphate as a religious duty would bode well for them. They made the concept of khalifa so profoundly attached to Islam whilst such concepts are unspoken of in the Qur'an. It started with Abu Bakr who was the first khalifa after the prophet's death. He declared a full-fledged war on apostates. Most reasonable people would see this as a political tool to keep everyone under the same religio-political roof. Then he set out to invade Persia and the Levant to extend his caliphate's influence. Ever since his caliphate, there would be a string of assassinations and wars in a never ending competition for power... ------------- Timidi mater non flet |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 16-Feb-2012 at 19:19
No, just very concerned. Who's to say these countries won't collapse into anarchy like Afghanistan and become havens for the next generation of terrorists? ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 16-Feb-2012 at 21:44
|
I got this book 'The Prophet's Pulpit - Islamic preaching in Contemporary Egypt" by Patric D. Gaffney, 1994 http://www.amazon.com/Prophets-Pulpit-Preaching-Contemporary-Comparative/dp/0520084721 - http://www.amazon.com/Prophets-Pulpit-Preaching-Contemporary-Comparative/dp/0520084721 it's an anthropological study that covers like 20 years between the 70s and the 90s, with excerpts from speeches etc. This had been going for quite a while. Here a short quote, from a sermon by Shaykh Umar, Apr. 6 1979: "...Why isn't the Qur'an our constitution? Why isn't the Qur'an the law and in the name of God written beneath all the laws and statutes? And don't say "in the name of the nation" /umma/ or in "the name of the people". Yes, the nation is above all our heads because it's of us and we are of it' so too the people are above our heads because it is of us and we are of it, but God is the greatest..." pg.309 "...Come on, all you of the army, come on Muhhamad al-Gamsi, the minister of the War of the Arabs, where did you study? Muhhammad didn't study like you in any military academy. Yest he conquered, first aming the Arabs where he was never defeated, then among the Persians where he was never defeated, among the Europeans where he was never defeated, in the whole world where he was never defeated. Why? Because God, exalted be he, taught him. It was the will of God, not his own will, for the promise of God is more perfect than what you have learned yourselves..." pg. 313 "... The Arab nation must return to all of this, to become judge/arbiter between east and West, between America and Europe and Russia, between heaven and earth, so they may exalt peace in Truth, in the name of Truth, in the name of justice, in the name of goodness..." pg 315. This is telling enough. And we must not forget that Egypt is not only home of Muslims, there are 9% Coptic Christians and 1% other Christians, according to http://https://www.cia.gov/index.html - http://https://www.cia.gov/index.html In 1980 Islam was declared state religion. What about the 10% Christians? The percent of 83,688,164 people is over 8 mln people, this is not a handful of souls, those are more people than in whole Bulgaria....don't they deserve a choice? I'm sure that there is a fair amount of agnostics, atheists, etc - what about them? It's one thing to live in a secular state and be a religious minority, completely different one to like in theocratic/religious-govenrment state and be such. ------------- |
Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 17-Feb-2012 at 01:23
1. Dictators don't have to be evil. "The term "dictator" is comparable to, but not synonymous with, the ancient concept of a tyrant; initially "tyrant", like "dictator", did not carry negative connotations." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictator - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictator . Tyrant is bad one, not dictator. 2. Not every democracy is good. There are some examples in east and west. Democracy doesn't guarantee human right, minority rights or justice 3. I just disagree their name. However there are similar names in europe too. That's idiodic for me. None of party should have a name which associates a nation or a religion or should put something like that in their party rules. ------------- Ellerin Kabe'si var, Benim Kabem İnsandır |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 17-Feb-2012 at 01:44
|
Nothing is guarantee for anything in our human reality. But dictatorship is bad - I lived in one. I'd take the worst day in my life in democratic US or chaotic ruined trying-to-be-democratic Bulgaria than my best day in communist Bulgaria. Democracy is like love - hard to keep, have to balance it all the time at the tip of a knife, can fun to other things, but that's life - there are no easy ways. If a way seems simple and clear and easy - it's a way to some kind of hell. ------------- |
Posted By: Baal Melqart
Date Posted: 17-Feb-2012 at 07:33
|
You guys have no idea how bad this is... you just wait and see! The copts in Egypt are going to become like second-class citizens and their rights will be taken away at the glimpse of an eye. ou guys should know that under such conditions, a group of 2 Muslims or more could testify in court against a Copt and claim that he converted to Islam. If the judge accepts this ruling even if the Copt denies this, he will be considered a Muslim (legally). Then if he denies it happened they will consider him an apostate and he could serve a very long term in jail, worst case scenario... death penalty! ------------- Timidi mater non flet |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 17-Feb-2012 at 12:59
|
That's what I'm afraid of, BM.
------------- |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 17-Feb-2012 at 13:08
Ah Baal ole son....you do me a diservice.  I've been studying and researching, observing and analyzing; and even at one point, over a decade of years, preparing contingency action plans, reference this stuff, within the region, for 40 years. And it can indeed get a lot worse. This is Isalmic fundamentalist fervor at it's best. And the likes of which has not been seen since the days of the Caliphate...or their counter to the Crusades..as you well know. Best bet? Keep them Tomahawks handy. ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: Baal Melqart
Date Posted: 17-Feb-2012 at 19:57
I think the Egyptians basically flushed their hard-earned revolution down the drain like it was TP. That's of course if votes weren't rigged to begin with, but the general feel tells me people really wanted these fundamentalists to come to power. All I can say is that there needs to be another revolution very soon or everything is going down the drain, no exageration here. [TUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKs7oi_-NUo[/TUBE] These are the people who are in power now... No comment guys! ------------- Timidi mater non flet |
Posted By: eurokiller
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 18:21
You love to lie, don't you? Is that why nearly all of the areas dominated by the Ottomans are still christian? The Ottomans controlled them for centuries ... yet the majority are all christian, and most of these areas started to flourish under Ottoman administration. What made euro christians commit nearly two full continental genocides? How is the whole of S America christian? Do they even know their original languages or culture? You can shamelessly accuse the Ottomans who took on the whole of europe at once and conquered those lands when euro christians committed more force conversions than any other religious group on earth. And that too of weak people.
|
Posted By: eurokiller
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 18:24
|
its amazing how euro genocidal maniacs have gone around the world just to kill, rob, and even forcibly intoxicate other people but can still shamelessly point fingers
also the Ottomans rob, murder and starve people to death like the euro terrorists of the 18th century to present ... Bengal, the richest most affluent place on earth was robbed until people started dying on the streets by the british ... perhaps the Ottomans were too kind and didn't give them what they deserved?
|
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 18:46
|
Mister Eurokiller, you are welcome to disagree with anything I say, as long as you keep away from personal insults. Such are not tolerated here, this is an informal warning. I don't "love to lie", and the fact that Christians forcibly converted South America to Christianity doesn't make Islam right to forcibly had converted the Balkans to Islam, this is "tu quoque" fallacy. Who converted whom happened all along history, and has nothing to do with being European or not, there isn't any sense to point fingers to it, because there are 3 pointing toward you every time you do that. Not only Europeans are "imperialistic", Islam is imperialistic too, to call the first so and the latter not is simply not right. ------------- |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 18:51
Whom are you calling "euro genocidal maniacs", again? This is a forum with rules for civility, keep that in mind, please. This is a second informal warning; next step will be a formal warning. The Ottomans did absolutely the same like whoever you call "18 century terrorists". They raped the Balkans, forcibly converted thousands of Christians, /giving then the choice between the Quran and the sword/, introduced the practice of the "dervishme" to the Balkan Christians to punish them for their religious choice, massacred the Thracian Bulgarians, /that's why there isn't a Bulgarian minority in Turkey, but there is Turkish minority in Bulgaria/ and genocided the Armenians. So, whoever you are glorifying is the same as whoever you are villifying. ------------- |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 19:20
Take heed of Don's words Eurokiller. You're on your first and last official warning.
------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Baal Melqart
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 19:24
|
Your claim Eurokiller is so vain and full of fallacies. You claim that the Ottomans and Muslims in general never forcefully converted anyone and your proof is that there are Christian minorities that survive. Now I don't disagree that Islam did bring a protectiive Dhimmi status to the conquered natives but the mere act of conquering can be labelled as forceful conversion. Why? Because history has proven over and over that culture and religion spread faster through conquest than using other methods. Don't also forget that the introduction of a minority with a different religion would easily cause tension to the dominated and not the dominator. It's about culture in the end... Either way, I don't really see the point of arguing with someone who shows the colours of deep bias and fanaticism for one's held opinion. Whether you like it or not, imperialism has existed with all religions because the faith is just a flavour that gets added to the greed of men which is found wherever one goes! ------------- Timidi mater non flet |
Posted By: eurokiller
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 22:40
|
Land is conquered genius Why don't the Mongols get accused of forced conversion then? They had the largest land empire in history. I was pissed when I wrote that, but that post you wrote there is complete nonsense. Conquest can lead to forced conversions but there has to actually be, you know, coercion involved. This is an oft repeated vain argument, especially when euro christians make it. Here is a real account of forced conversion In 1560, the Spanish rulers of Peru sentenced Lope de la Pena, described as a "Moor from Guadalajara", to life imprisonment for the crime of "having practiced and spread Islam" in Cuzco and was also required to wear the Sanbenito around his neck for his entire imprisonment.[5][6][7] Other sources give his name as Alvaro Gonzalez.[8] His colleague, the mulatto "son of a Spaniard [Juan Solano] and a black woman",[9][10][11] Luis Solano was similarly convicted of spreading Islam, but was executed for the offence.[12][13] As persecution increased in the Spanish dependencies, Muslims ceased identifying themselves by their religion and became nominal Christians; eventually Islam disappeared from the country entirely.[14] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Peru - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Peru
"freedom of religion" eh
|
Posted By: eurokiller
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 22:45
What Turkish minority? Genocide is what the Serbs did to the Bosnian Muslims ... How stupid can you be to claim that there isn't a Bulgarian minority in Turkey? They never lived in Turkey in the first place, so of course there isn't! Yeah they massacred them, thats why they still exist unlike the Natives of North America and Australia. Typical shameless euro lies and BS ... Armenians had a history of continuous war against the Turks and are crawling every where in their country ... You seem to ignore the massacres of Turks in these countries ... it was either the cross or death in europe, every single Muslim in Spain was either forced to convert by Papal decree or tortured and murdered But of course I'm not claiming that forced conversions didn't happen amongst Muslims ... that idea of Islam spreading by force is false is all I'm saying ... and that european christians have been the most brutal
|
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 23:23
|
Mister eurokiller, what is Turkish Thracia now used to be Bulgaria, and full with Bulgarians, who were genocided in 1913, as documented by independent American observers "...As has already been said, at a short distance from Havsa is Osmanly, a Bulgarian village, and there the Turks took their revenge, when they returned after the retreat of the Bulgarians. There were 114 Christian Bulgarian houses in the village. Not a single one was spared. The churches in the villages were burned and razed to the ground. The member of the Commission could see nothing but the outline of the precincts and the remains of the walls. Research in the interior recovered nothing but the debris of two chandeliers. The member of the Commission, investigating among the cinders, discovered some bits of half burned paper; they were fragments of the Gospel and the Sunday office, in Greek characters (see p. 125). The population had fled to Adrianople and from the Bulgarian frontier, i. e., towards Our Pasha. The whole of the cattle had been lost. Some dozen villagers were, however, working at the harvest in the village. ..." http://www.ilinden.info/en/carnegie/chapter3_2.html - http://www.ilinden.info/en/carnegie/chapter3_2.html Bulgaria used to be all the way to the the Aegean Sea, before the Turks arrived http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/Campaigns_of_Ivan_Assen_II.png"> Now none is left. So don't tell me that Bulgarians didn't live in what is now Turkey. ------------- |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 23:29
You just exceeded your 3 warnings. ------------- |
Posted By: eurokiller
Date Posted: 21-Feb-2012 at 23:49
| I see the words "Turks took their REVENGE" in there, probably meaning that this was a response to a Bulgarian massacre against the Turks, mister Don |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 22-Feb-2012 at 01:08
|
It cannot be said that the natives of Nothern America and Australia don't exist, because they do. If you wnat data on this just google it. The Native American were genocided in many ways, but they managed to survive. I live between 2 Native American communities, the Spokanes and the Kalispels , and substutute-teach in a school where they learn they hardest langauge I had ever seen - Salish Native American; I should know. You show me in Turkey schools where Bulgarian minority study Bulgarian language, and is financed to do that by the Turkish state. The Australian Aborigines didn't face an organized genocide, AFAIK. None of those ethnic groups are extant per se. It is useless anyway to compare human suffering and to say who suffered more - all suffered. The Bulgarians in Turkish Thrace don't exist, I tried to find any, they simply don't. It's very well seen who genocided who in Thrace - Bulgarians are extant there, pure and simple. If you want to object on that, please supply data on the population of any Bulgarian minority in Turkey. This is an ethnic map of the Balkans in 19th century: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/Balkans-ethnique.JPG">  It's plainly seen that there were plenty of Bulgarians in Thrace, now there aren't any Bulgarians, and I got this info from Turks who live in Thrace. Whoever wasn't killed or expelled was forcibly Turkified and Islamised. Armenians - yes, they rebelled against the Turks, as they should, they were enslaved and mistreated population. They were genocided, women and kids, driven in the Syrian deserts, women raped and stuck on poles through their genitals, and those who accepted Islam to save their lives were sold as sex slaves in Turkish harems; as were the Assyrians, and a fair amount of Greeks. Any attempts to show the Ottoman Empire as some paradise of peace and understanding is simply not panning, there is too much data against that. Which brings my bottom line - every culture and nation under the sun was at some point colonized, mistreated, genocides, etc, and most did that to someone else too; so to single out one culture, one continent or one nation as some devil, and another as some angelic creature fails. Humans do one thing best - destroying their fellow humans, and they do that under the flag of a religion, or political system, or whatever - this is besides the point. No religion or Empire ever conquered another nation with hugs, and won over it with kisses, and Islam is not an exemption by any standards. Islam had been spread by force in the Balkans, in North Africa, and in India/Pakistan. If it didn't spread by force, it would stay on the Arabian Peninsula, around Mecca and Medina, from where it started. It got where it is now because of conquest, not because of kisses. There were Muslim missionaries, I hear, in India, but there were Christian missionaries everywhere too. There is no difference between the Spanish forcing Christianity on the Native Americans in S.America, and the Arabs and Turks forcing Islam on Syrians, Egyptians /who were predominantly Christians when the Arabs got there/, Indians, Balkan peoples, etc. ------------- |
Posted By: Baal Melqart
Date Posted: 22-Feb-2012 at 13:55
|
Awesome, Eurokiller was suspended for 3 days! Let's celebrate, tea anyone?
------------- Timidi mater non flet |
Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 23-Feb-2012 at 03:17
Bulgarian majority in East Thrace is a Bulgarian national fair tale, if it exists in Bulgaria. Are you telling Edirne is a Bulgarian city in early 20th century? Listen once again,what you are saying?
Posting your empire biggest map asking why we don't have these land now? I have no words to say agaist it. You are seeing big bulgaria in the map. However I am seeing aegean coast and even north thrace are not homeland of bulgarian nation. They have expended and colonized these land.
You can'tsay none. There is bulgarian community in Turkey. Yes they are a few,less than a 1000. However my first answer of this situation is not geniocide, as you did with high level of nationalism
My first answer is immigration as turk did in 1989 or before or after
There is no and aslo there is no community child that much. There are just 3 minorities schools Greeks, Armenians and Jews in Turkey as Turkey accept it with Treaty of Lausanne
There is no West Thrace Turks or Crete Turks or Rodose Turks in your map. I don't think that your map is quite trustable for turkish population
Here is my map from year 1912
 ------------- Ellerin Kabe'si var, Benim Kabem İnsandır |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 23-Feb-2012 at 10:43
|
This is not what I'm saying, Ollios. My point was that Islam is not an exception when it comes to imperialism, as this opinion was stated. I was giving an example with the Turks invading the Balkans. This has nothing to do with having any land now, I was just provlng that Bulgarians used to live all the way to the Aegean Sea, as it was stated here that they never lived where Turkey is now. There were Bulgarian living in East Thrace, this is not a fairy tale. I have no desire to turn this in any nationalistic dispute. I'm not saying that there weren't Turks in Thrace, and my point wasn't to list all Turkish population around - my point was - there were Bulgarians in Thrace, they don't exist now, pure and simple. In the end, it doesn't matter who is what and who lives where, we all will die anyway, but to say that a population didn't exist where it did is historically not true. Now, to claim genocide is not nationalism, and not a high level of it. Genocide is exterminating a part f population, planned as apolitical action like the Armenian genocide, like the genocide of Native Americans, this is a historic fact. As I said, almost any population in history was genocided at some point of time and space, there is nothing so strange in it. Don't try to turn what I'm saying as historic fact into a nationalistic dispute, I'm not doing that. Besides, a claimed Armenian genocide, not a Bulgarian one - the Bulgarians were massacred, and expelled, and whoever stayed was assimilated, but AFAIK there wasn't a governmetally approved plan to do so as it was in the Armenian case. This cannot be refuted. Please, let's respect each other's opinions and don't imply something in my words that I didn't put there. People conquered each other since the beginning of time, this is normal - what I object to is presenting one side's conquests as murder and imperialism, and the other side's same behavior as something somehow different. If one is using a standard, any standard, the same standard has t o be applied to everyone. not only to one side. Any empire was build with imperialism, the Ottoman Empire is not an exception, nor is Islam per se. I'm not going to talk anymore about local problems on this thread. I stated a general fact - Islam is not exception when it comes to imperialism, this is it; I was giving an example, and if I delved more in it it was because I was accused in stupidity, so I posted sources to prove my point. If you want to discuss Turkey per se, this has to be done on an appropriate thread, and not with me, I'm talking about generalities, and have no desire to go on local ground, and discuss which strip or land is whose, that is useless discussion to start with, because everyone conquered some land at some point that was not originally his - he Bulgars and Slavs came to the Balkans and extreminated/assimilated the Thracians, the Turks came after the Bulgarians etc, so goes history. This thread is not about Bulgaria and Turkey, it's about Egypt. ------------- |
Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 23-Feb-2012 at 19:52
Yes, I can agree both of them have imperial face. However, how does it revelant with Egypt. even the Christinanity when started to be formal religion in Roman Empire, it also became imperial. No mosque protests or bands of minaret in democratic Europe, show the point where they stand, not to much different.
my first protests are these words "plenty of Bulgarian" , Aegean Sea and your opinion agaist Bulgarian community in Turkey
now you are changing my words, I was talking about bulgarian majority in East Thrace
I told you, there are still bulgarians in Turkey. It is also pure and simple fact. If you can't find it, it don't make that they don't exist. http://www.svetistephan.com/tr/index.html - http://www.svetistephan.com/tr/index.html http://tr-tr.facebook.com/pages/Bulgar-Eksarhl%C4%B1%C4%9F%C4%B1-Ortodoks-Kilisesi-Vakf%C4%B1/230837000263816 - http://tr-tr.facebook.com/pages/Bulgar-Eksarhl%C4%B1%C4%9F%C4%B1-Ortodoks-Kilisesi-Vakf%C4%B1/230837000263816
First of all, you do not even know them. How do you know their problems? one of the biggest problem of Bulgarian comminty in Turkey is Greek community in Turkey. a well known bulgarian in Turkey is Bojidar Çipof. He was also previous chief of Bulgarian comminty group and well-known with his cases against Greek patriarchate. His book "Patrikhane ile Mücadelem" (my fight against patriarchate) http://blog.milliyet.com.tr/patrikhane-ile-mucadelem---bulgar-eksarhligi-vakfi-nda-15-yil--yazan--bojidar-cipof/Blog/?BlogNo=255879 - http://blog.milliyet.com.tr/patrikhane-ile-mucadelem---bulgar-eksarhligi-vakfi-nda-15-yil--yazan--bojidar-cipof/Blog/?BlogNo=255879 http://www.google.com.tr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=Bulgar+Ortodoks+Kiliseleri+Vakf%C4%B1&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB8QtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymotion.com%2Fvideo%2Fxb6ndv_bojydar-cypof-bulgar-ortodoks-kylys_shortfilms&ei=P85GT-itKuKy0QX-75WQDg&usg=AFQjCNFdqkXSYPWG_ZLk4PDi0NObnLpaiA&cad=rja -
Yes it is. İf you put everything into term genocide. What about term civil war??? some snookered nations are just using this term to get some positive image. If a nation has already started to fight for being indepence or getting more land as bulgarian did in first balkan war, I call it war.
These are your tools for creating similarity between egypt and ottoman. That's makes, I have rights to argue them.
Did I put anything into your words? Can you see any adds in the white bloks? These are your words from your previous posts. If you see something like that, it means, that's my mistake. Sorry for that. ------------- Ellerin Kabe'si var, Benim Kabem İnsandır |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 23-Feb-2012 at 20:59
|
The links you posted abut the Bulgarian minority in Turkey is in Istanbul, not in Thrace, I claimed that there is no Bulgarian minority left in Thrace. I didn't say that there was "Bulgarian majority" in Thrace. I said "plenty of Bulgarians", this is not the same as "majority". As for the Armenian genocide - this is not a "tool", this is well accepted historically notion, if not a fact. Civil war and the driving of the Armenians, women and children, in the desert to die are different things. If one is to justify mass killing of innocents with a political situation, then the Jewish genocide should be justified too. I am not creating any similarity between the Ottoman Empire and Egypt, I was talking about Islam not being an exception of the fact that empires are build with imperalism. And I'm not going to fight strawmen; if you are accusing me in "nationalism" because I accept the Armenian genocide as a genocide, you have the right to report my post. I find such an accusation unappropriate, as to talk about the Jewish genocide, and Stalinist political cleansings/genocide is not nationalism, but history, I apply the same standard to any other country. Mass killing of people from one nationality conceived as a plan by the ruling then political party is a genocide by definition, and the Armenian one falls in this category. This is history, not nationalism. Hence, you may disagree with me as much as you want, but you have no right to accuse me in negative notions such as "nationalism" only because I apply the same standard to everyone. Next, who exactly is forbidding mosques in Europe? Only Switzwenland, in some places, AFAIK, and have the right to do so. Are you going to welcome a random Chrsitian denomination to build churches anywhere they want in Turkey? No, this is up to the country to decide if there will be mosques or churches or not. Besides, the Muslims who want those mosques are emigrants, and emigrant are supposed to obey the laws of the country that accepts them, not the other way around - I'm an emigrant, I know something about that. The Copts in Egypt are not emigrants, they have historic rights, they where in Egypt before Islam got there, this is a completely different situation. There are how many Turks in Europe, 7 mln, or so, who makes them to become Christians? There is no, AFAIK, winning Christian nationalistic party in Europe that claims the right to impose the bible as a constitution of the country, if someone was saying this, /like the whoever guy I posted quote from as doing/ I would be most disturbed. So, it's not the same, to live in a country that is secular, and have the religion you want to follow, and to live in a country that is not secular. This is another topis I'm not going to discuss with you - if you see them as the same - a possible Egyptian fundamentalist government, and EU, this is your personal opinion, not a fact. ------------- |
Posted By: Ollios
Date Posted: 24-Feb-2012 at 05:53
European part of Istanbul is also part of a Thrace. It is simple geography During the Bulgarian occupsion in East Thrace(1th balkan war), many Turk left the Thrace. We can say that same things happened Bulgarians in 2th balkan war, when bulgaria lost the war. After the 2nd Balkan War (I think that is one of the biggest tradegy for Bulgarians) but Bulgaria is also lost land against Romania and Greece and after that Bulgarian population of those lands fell dramatically. Does any bulgarian blame religion of Greece or Romania? look at this website http://h-net.org/%7Ehabsweb/sourcetexts/greeks1.htm - http://h-net.org/~habsweb/sourcetexts/greeks1.htm does any bulgarian blame greece to make genocide? or try to make similarity between greek religion and those acts? Last of Bulgarians in Turkey have supposed to left Turkey after 1925 Agreement which allows the minorities to take their goods and left the country for both side. Many Turks came to Turkey after the agreement.
Yes, it is your tool to show situation muslim goverment and christian minorities and that is your accepted nation not mine or not these guys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Armenian_Genocide_deniers - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Armenian_Genocide_deniers
If you don't talk about something Egypt or can be similar with it, you should open a new topic. Why did you choose Ottoman? because religion. You are just turning around the words
Nationalism is not something you can accuse someone. My attitude against your closed theories *this map shows "plenty of bulgarian", but they are not in there now. That means they were genocided by someone *I accept the Armenian genocide as a genocide *your theory about Thrace and Istanbul these are easy and closed mining also you don't left any open gate to someone can argue with you.
That shouldn't up to the country, Turkey or Switzwenland. Each religion have deserve respect.
First generation can be migrants, however people who were born in there, are local people not migrants. I have been in London too for more than one a half year, maybe I don't have much opinion as you have, but being a christian migrant in diffirent christian country different than being muslim migrant.
Of cource, they have. If I have change to visit Egypt, I wanna see a coptic church. But also egyptian pagan had too. You are worried about coptics after Islamic goverment will be select by democrarcy in Egypt. However, according to your words, there is no problem whatever happened in Europe against muslims, these are just local things, it ups to goverments. even they have citizenship, they are just migrant it does't matter, killed German Turks or fired mosques in Bulgaria or proposed none started mosque in Athens.
How can you talking about secularity and from up side "this is up to the country to decide...". This perpective have none contact with secularity. it is contrast. Country or other majority people of country shouldn't have rights to talk about minorities religion.
again close mining. Your opinion is fact but my is just personel  Is that your way of respect others opinions? (as you seem it important)------------------------------ my main point is that you can not make a general judment on Ottoman or Islam like that. If every islamic goverment is threat, every christian goverment is threat too. main problem is people who believe religion X, have to face problems when they are living in people of religion Y's country. You can put whatever religion you want into X and Y. This shouldn't suppose to be. ------------- Ellerin Kabe'si var, Benim Kabem İnsandır |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 24-Feb-2012 at 09:58
|
Istanbul is Istanbul, not rural Thrace. When you saw "New York" one thinks of the city, not some village in the corner of the same state/. I didn't mean Istanbul when I said "Thrace". No, my opinion is not a fact, Olliso, I never said that, it's an opinion like yours.It's an opinion to say that "no country should have bans of churches or mosques", and that EU as doing the same as possible Egyptian Islamists can do - it's an opinion because it depends on the POV, not on what already happened. I'm not sure with you mean with "close mining" expression. As for not leaving a door - I'm not here to convince you, or anyone for that matter, I just state what I think about the matter - to try to convince you would be pushing my opinion on you, which I don;t like to do, nor do I like someone to push his opinion on me. There are some facts, however, things that really happened, like between 1mln and 1.5 mln Armenians were killed, /if I kill you, this would be a fact, I think you would agree with that/ the death of so many people is fact. I'll not change my standards I apply to every country, and call it something else only because you want me so. So, one is entitled to one's own opinions, but not to one's own facts. Our opinions differ, I don't mind, you keep your opinion, I keep mine. Certain things are facts, they cannot be changed - how dies is a fact, who was raped, and starved, those are facts. Again, I was jut proving that Islam was/is as much imperialistic as Europe was told here to be, Turkey was just an example, I gave other examples too, like North Africa. This is not a thread about Turkey per se, I'm not going to talk about it. ------------- |