Stuff Out of Turkey

[ekrem]

sorry to get off topic here...but I am really curious...Do y'all eat Turkey in Turkey?

Yes, Turks eat Turkeys. and other things, too. But Turkey-animal has no drug-effect which you oviously meant replying such a non-sense as an answer to my post.

What is your view, archangel, when I may ask you? Air-Strike? Invasion or Nuclear-Iran?

 

[archangel]

Yes, Turks eat Turkeys. and other things, too. But Turkey-animal has no drug-effect which you oviously meant replying such a non-sense as an answer to my post.

What is your view, archangel, when I may ask you? Air-Strike? Invasion or Nuclear-Iran?

I was honestly curious...no chemistry was intended...I'm not a teach as a few in here are..I was just curious being that it is Christmas and all...and as for your question...hell yeah like the rattle snake analogy..ya hear the rattle so step on it!

 

[ekrem]

I was honestly curious...no chemistry was intended...I'm not teach as a few in here are..I was just curious being that it is Christmas and all...and as for your question...hell yeah like the rattle snake analogy..ya hear the rattle so step on it!

Yes sorry then. Misunderstood. Sorry. Mentioned it before: But a merry christmas to you, too.

Muslim Turks do not celebrate Christmas. But Christian Turks do. For them Santa claus comes 2-times. On Christmas and New-Year.

For Muslim Turks Santa Clause comes on New-Year celebrations. All dressed like in the west-culture.

Nikolause, which is the original Santa-clause comes from Turkish territory on the South coast. But When Nicolause lived there, Anatolia was not settled by Turks. Turks where then still in the steppes of central-asia.

 

[archangel]

Yes sorry then. Misunderstood. Sorry. Mentioned it before: But a merry christmas to you, too.

Muslim Turks do not celebrate Christmas. But Christian Turks do. For them Santa claus comes 2-times. On Christmas and New-Year.

For Muslim Turks Santa Clause comes on New-Year celebrations. All dressed like in the west-culture.

Nikolause, which is the original Santa-clause comes from Turkish territory on the South coast. But When Nicolause lived there, Anatolia was not settled by Turks. Turks where then still in the steppes of central-asia.

Merry Christmas to you and yours!

 

[Said1]

Muslim Turks do not celebrate Christmas. But Christian Turks do. For them Santa claus comes 2-times. On Christmas and New-Year.

I just informed my daughter of this phenomena. She's not impressed. Firstly, does everyone get presents twice and how does he TIME for this. It's not possible. It just can't be. If it is, it's not fair.

Sorry for the hijack, but I had to post this after telling her the news about Turkish Santa.

 

[archangel]

I just informed my daughter of this phenomena. She's not impressed. Firstly, does everyone get presents twice and how does he TIME for this. It's not possible. It just can't be. If it is, it's not fair.

Sorry for the hijack, but I had to post this after telling her the news about Turkish Santa.

St Nick was from Turkey a Catholic Bishop 4th Century so they can call it on this one!

 

[ekrem]

I just informed my daughter of this phenomena. She's not impressed. Firstly, does everyone get presents twice and how does he TIME for this. It's not possible. It just can't be. If it is, it's not fair.

Sorry for the hijack, but I had to post this after telling her the news about Turkish Santa.

Yes, Merry christmas to you too.

http://www.livius.org/a/turkey/myra/myra02.html

No. Not evryone gets prensents 2 times. Only Turkish christians (greek, Assyrian origin mainly). They celebrate Christmas in Christian context on the same day as Christians do in other countries.

Plus in Turkish culture it has established since, i don't know since when, that Santa Claus comes on new year. Of course from the chimney and with his rein-deers.
But on 31. December 24:00 //// 1.Januar 0:00

 

[Said1]

Yes, Merry christmas to you too.

http://www.livius.org/a/turkey/myra/myra02.html

No. Not evryone gets prensents 2 times. Only Turkish christians (greek, Assyrian origin mainly). They celebrate Christmas in Christian context on the same day as Christians do in other countries.

Plus in Turkish culture it has established since, i don't know since when, that Santa Claus comes on new year. Of course from the chimney and with his rein-deers.
But on 31. December 24:00 //// 1.Januar 0:00

Well, I won't tell her. I have enough grey (maybe) hair as it is. :

 

[nbdysfu]

From SHIA Mullah-View Sunnite Turkey is bad. Suniite Secularistic Turkey is even much more worse for them. They trained Turkish islamist terrorists to overthrow Turkish secularistic system. Also they backed PKK against Turkey.
But now, no wonder, IRAN is being pushed against the wall by USA, Iran is cooperating with TURKEY against PKK.

If you think about it you know that you have us to thank for that. As you say, Iran's unwilling dropping of its actions upon your country is a direct result of US presence. Without us there they would still be supporting the PKK, and if we leave they probably will continue.

Since Iraq-war USA did nothing to please Turkey in case of PKK while Iran was enthuasticly willing to work with Turkey against PKK. IRAN even made attacks and cleaned its territory from PKK to please Turkey. Of course Iran didn't do this because they like Turkey but because of self-interest.

They did it because our presence in the region is scaring the bjs out of them.

You see: There went something really bad the last years. Because USA is in the region and operating against turkish interest so far in Iraq.

I think as Iraq becomes more stable and independent, the US will distance itself from any Kurdish movement for statehood. From what I've read, the PKK garners little support among all ethnic Kurds, and the US will support what they vote for. The main reason for US-Kurd alliance has been against Baathist control of Iraq. But you're missing the bigger picture that US presence in Iraq is beneficial to Turkey because it forces Iran's strategy against Turkey.

And USA is World-power so Turkey is tooth-crushing within its own boarders and thinks of possible prevention to such a Kurdish-state.

This seems like it would be a mistake, as, from what I understand the reason PKK has lost support among Kurds is that Turkey lifted its bans on Kurdish language and culture 15 years ago. And again I seriously doubt the US has any interest in a Kurdish state now that Iraq is on its way.

 

[ekrem]

The United States government reportedly began coordinating with NATO its plans for a possible military attack against Iran.

The German newspaper Der Tagesspiegel collected various reports from the German media indicating that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization are examining the prospects of such a strike.

According to the report, CIA Director Porter Goss, in his last visit to Turkey on December 12, requested Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to provide military bases to the United States in 2006 from where they would be able to launch an assault.

The German news agency DDP also noted that countries neighboring Iran, such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman, and Pakistan were also updated regarding the supposed plan. American sources sent to those countries apparently mentioned an aerial attack as a possibility, but did not provide a time frame for the operation.

Although Der Spiegel could not say that these plans were concrete, they did note that according to a January 2005 New Yorker report American forces had entered Iran in 2005 in order to mark possible targets for an aerial assault.


http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1135696369601&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull



I don't think a german newspaper can now such detailed informations what CIA wanted from Turkey.
Further they say a NATO-inolement is possible. We have to see if NATO is open to such a involvement of Air-strikes and on which basis NATO-states will involve.
Maybe Israelian involvement will not be. Wich is of course the best option for Israel.

Happy new year 2006

 

[Annie]

I saw that article and like you, question how a German newspaper, especially one so wholely committed to undermining the US would have so much information.

My guess, they think this is more US bashing, the 'mighty war maker' and all that.

 

[Annie]

Here's something that reflects better what I was trying to say; links at site:

http://www.nicedoggie.net/2006/index.php/?p=20

December 31, 2005
Fireworks Being Planned?
Filed under: , Free Iran!, Useless Swine

(Via LC & IB Jeff G.)

The U.S. government has called on NATO members to prepare for a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the German daily Der Spiegel reported Saturday.

NATO officials said the United States is seriously weighing the possibility of military action against Iran.

And from the Jerusalem Post:

The United States government reportedly began coordinating with NATO its plans for a possible military attack against Iran.

The German daily Der Spiegel collected various reports from the German media indicating that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization are examining the prospects of such a strike.

According to the report, CIA chief Porter Gus, in his last visit to Turkey on December 12, requested Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to provide military bases to the United States in 2006 from where they would be able to launch an assault.

The German news agency DDP also noted that countries neighboring Iran, such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman, and Pakistan were also updated regarding to supposed plan. American sources sent to those countries apparently mentioned an aerial attack as a possibility, but did not provide a time frame for the operation.

Although Der Spiegel could not say that these plans were concrete, they did note that according to a January 2005 New Yorker report American forces had entered Iran in 2005 in order to mark possible targets for an aerial assault.

Ahhh… I love this kind of game.

So it all comes down to a leak (intentional, no doubt) to Der Spiegel which is high on innuendo and low on actual useful facts. Yep, it’s a plant alright.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that we aren’t planning an attack, since it should be pretty damn obvious to anybody with a functioning brain that negotiations aren’t working one little bit and time is running out — FAST. If we don’t, the Israelis will do it alone, because they have no choice.

What it does mean is that we’ve reached the point where we find it useful to signal our intent to the Turbaned Tumblefucks of Tehran, which again means that the unproductive diplomacy dance is going out of style fast and our leaders are acknowledging that fact at long last. Acknowledging it openly, that is, since I’m sure that they’ve been aware of it for quite some time.

How will Mahmoud Ahmadinnerplate react to this? Time will tell. The ball is definitely in their court now, and the immediate future will decide if things start going BOOM in Iran.

Welcome to Phase II.

And Happy New Year Too!

 

[ekrem]

The first article came from "Der Spiegel" of Germany which is leftist political magazine (my categorizing). "Der Spiegel" relied on a german Terrorism-Expert, named Udo Ulfkotte.


The Jerusalem Post relied on this article of "Der Spiegel". Plus they relied on a German serious newspaper called "Der Tagesspiegel".

Der Tagesspiegel on its orignal article doesn't rely on a so-called SINGLE Terrorism-expert. But on NATO-security circles.

The article of "Der Tagesspiegel" can be found here in its original form via an online Translation service.
http://www.online-translator.com/ur...n&transliterate=on&psubmit2.x=43&psubmit2.y=6


Now it leads to following question: On which basis will NATO involve itself in these Air-Strikes when there is no situation that leads to Article 5 of NATO.
And what will France's reaction will be?
More like a coalition of States within NATO-coalition. When USA thinks to involve NATO in this issue it will lead to inevitable controversy within NATO like it did before Iraq-War.

 

[Annie]

The first article came from "Der Spiegel" of Germany which is leftist political magazine (my categorizing). "Der Spiegel" relied on a german Terrorism-Expert, named Udo Ulfkotte.


The Jerusalem Post relied on this article of "Der Spiegel". Plus they relied on a German serious newspaper called "Der Tagesspiegel".

Der Tagesspiegel on its orignal article doesn't rely on a so-called SINGLE Terrorism-expert. But on NATO-security circles.

The article of "Der Tagesspiegel" can be found here in its original form via an online Translation service.
http://www.online-translator.com/ur...n&transliterate=on&psubmit2.x=43&psubmit2.y=6


Now it leads to following question: On which basis will NATO involve itself in these Air-Strikes when there is no situation that leads to Article 5 of NATO.
And what will France's reaction will be?
More like a coalition of States within NATO-coalition. When USA thinks to involve NATO in this issue it will lead to inevitable controversy within NATO like it did before Iraq-War.

NATO is just a false horse. It's nearly totally equipped and manned by US. It no longer serves the function of an 'organization', since that would imply cooperation that has been totally lacking for over 20 years.

France and Germany's duplicity with NATO a couple of years ago, put 'quit' on NATO for many Americans. I do not think most of the world understands the US. Funny how they keep asking the US to ponder, "Why do they hate you?" When a better self preservation question for these countries would be, "How do we use whatever soft power we have, to stay on the better side of the US?" Truth to tell, paraphrasing from the Marine saying, the US is fully deserving of the quote: "no worse enemy, no better friend."