No announcement yet.

2016 Turkish Coup Attempt

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Neo-osmanism as expected.


    • What is neo-osmanism you have expected? What kind of neo-osmanism done in holland?


      • Originally posted by isim View Post
        What is neo-osmanism you have expected? What kind of neo-osmanism done in holland?

        Answer will be a bit long and I have to do it in parts.

        Part one-Like a moth to a flame...

        As per Quran teachings go, lands that once belonged to the Dar al Islam must be regain as the Allah commands so. Therefore, it is only natural to assume that Turkey has the ambitions to rebuild Ottoman Empire as it once was. If we expand this even further, Islam wants to conquer the entire globe according to its teachings and that goes along these lines as well. As such, this, lets say, desire is implanted in the heart and mind of any Muslim and it is embedded into their very existence. It governs their thoughts, wishes, essence, it governs their life. Thanks to the idiots of French enlightenment, whom were too narcissistic and self absorbed to think outside the box, aka outside of their solipsistic world view, in which they are the most advanced this and that, a notion of rational man was formed and the religious context was bluntly simplified. In short, the French light bearers, thought that people have the same relationship with religion as Christians do. For them, there was no difference than, between Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Paganism or what ever as they saw themselves as "enlighten" and being able to see trough and above religious dogma's. They were above that plane of thinking. Slowly, the notion that the religion has to do anything with human existence, was slowly fading away, giving space to the rise of rationalism. By defining the man as rational and glorifying rational thought, French luminaries, fell victim to their vanity and short slightness, as humans are not rational beings, yet irrational. The only reason why these luminaries had such a narrow view, lies in a simple fact that they were all well off, maybe not a mega sliver spooners but they were rich enough so that they could live off their thoughts. In other words, they enjoyed lush lifestyle without any physical labor that would keep their feet on the ground and in the reality as it was experienced by majority of the population. Their teachings lead to the establishment of the rational thought, which will render the religion as an obsolete way of thinking and according to the progressive dogma, irrelevant. They were mighty, they had science, deduction, golden rule, cause and effect...they had science. With science came technology and the glory of scientific knowledge which promised endless possibilities. There was no limit to human development and everything was possible, with enough knowledge and will. People were free to chose their own path, as there was nothing to govern them and control them as before. Nothing to limit them... Freedom and choice became the main theme as lack of those was seen as main obstacle to achieving happiness and life fulfillment...


        • Originally posted by kato View Post
          The Turkish/Dutch/(German) standoff is starting to get interesting.
          Elections are near.
          No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

          To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.


          • Tomorrow for the Netherlands. Will be interesting whether this will give a push to Rutte.


              In slamming the Dutch over their inactivity in Srebrenica during the war in Bosnia, Erdogan should remember the old saying about throwing rocks while living in a glass house. ie. Armenian Genocide!!!
              When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow. - Anais Nin


              • Relativism

                As the religion as a concept, was fading away, rise of rationalism inevitably lead to relativism, since focal point aka marker was removed from view. Logical relativism and especially when placed in a progressive context, laid ground for formation of radical ideas, such as communism. Because according to it, everything that existed in the past, is automatically rendered obsolete and therefore useless and irrelevant. Non existent but in a longer term, damaging aka bad. This stance can be clearly seen in our case, with the Karl Marx, whom advocated political genocide against us, while we were still Ottoman subjects, whom also had similar ideas but from a different part of the spectrum. Relativism can be also found in a ideologies of fascism and Nazism, of course conveniently rationally presented trough notions of culture supremacy in the case of Nazism or with the sense of mission (to rebuild Roman Empire, trough corporate structure, in the case of fascism). In all of these cases, progressiveness and relativism was strongly present, the only difference was for whom was benefiting from it. Nazis promised progress for the Aryan race only and rendered everyone else less worthy aka sub human and scheduled for extermination while communists did the same, rendering ones whom were too backwards in their view, obsolete and thus scheduled for extermination. The clash of these two ideas ended as we all know, in the hell of WW 2 and out of their ashes, new form of relativism rose this time in the form globalism.

                However, this progressive bonanza was only valid for the western world not for the rest.


                • Undertow

                  This "mental" or "ideological" roller coaster ride that was happening in the West, made its population excited but dazed. All those ups and downs, provided the thrill but they couldn't hide the fact that the ride was a closed loop. A circle. From bust to boom, from depression to recovery, from decadence to progress, from one "revolution" to another...Very dynamic form of existence, it might seem. It surely looks like it, if you are a riding the ride. But its not like that if you are bystander. For the ones whom didn't had the money to pay for the ride or courage to ride it, resentment settled in.

                  The anger developed in them, took two basic routes. The ones whom didn't had the money for the ride, blamed the West for robbing them of it. That created the envy foundation, upon which, their hate resides.

                  The ones whom were to afraid of it, an narcissistic reaction to it was formed in the form of denial and aggression towards it.Their foundation of hate is fear.

                  Problem that arises in this context, is very simple. The ride is very exciting if you never ride it, but if you are born of it, it became the default state of being and it becomes boring, because it is normal to you. However since the context you are born in is, in fact abnormal but you perceive it as normal, this means that normality for you is actually abnormality.

                  So the current state of affairs is that, we have bored and depressed riders of the western roller coaster ride and angry bystanders whom hate it but want to ride it and ones whom are too afraid of it and want to destroy it together with the riders.

                  The migrants, the meat of the Hegira.

                  For the dazed Europeans, bored they look like unhappy people in search of happiness. European ride owners, saw that European customers whom were riding the carousel, are not riding it, that they are bored of it. They see migrants as a new potential customers for the ride and desperately want to get rid of the old ones and attract new ones. They see profit in them and for them migrants are just the right thing because they see them as customers, assets so to speak, that will keep them in business. So they are offering trials, free ride for them to get them hooked. In the same time, they are treating badly the old customers, denying them their birth right to ride the roller coaster. Owners, are even willing to reduce the quality of the ride, to cut few safety measures, just to keep the ride going, even if that means making the ride prone to catastrophic failure.

                  I believe that, poetically speaking, this is the crock of the issue for the European "tolerance" and "humanity" towards Hegira. They don't see it for what it is, because for them its ideological motifs are irrelevant aka they are obsolete and according to the progressive mantra, everything that resides in the past is useless. That is why they are welcoming "the migrants" while in the same time alienating the domestic population. Its the US model, of perpetual story of energy, excitement and oh yes, the infamous mantra of opportunity, for all people, regardless of their inner dynamic. Problem with the US model is that it cannot recognize difference, yet it tries to melt everything into one ambiguous whole under the mantra of "diversity", foolishly thinking that if there is no borders and boundaries, the reason for conflict will cease to exist, thus ensuring the eternal peace and love...Yeah right.

                  That works only if people are willing to give up their identity if they think that they will gain something better from the new one. However, if people see less value in the new identity, they will keep it and they will not sell it.

                  For the R-selected southerners, this is exactly the notion that they have and it is this notion that gives them confidence that they owe anything to the West and that they have every right to take everything from it. Those Western K-selected wolves, those predators whom oppressed them are now domesticated puppies whom "just want to be nice and good". Opportunistic as they are, they took that opportunity and they came to the wolves den, fearless not because they are brave, but because there is nothing to be afraid of.

                  And they came not to pet, but to kill.


                  • Conclusion

                    So the dynamic is as such.

                    Being R-selected, Muslims due to their lack of ability to delay gratification are unable to control their urges and behavior. They are slaves to their biological impulses so all they do is kill and rape, that is the whole mantra of their lifestyle. Being R-selected, the average IQ is low making them unable to adjust to new environment. Since they are unable to adjust they seek to adjust environment to themselves and since they are with average low IQ, they do it with force. That is why you see criminal activity and terror activity skyrocketing where ever they decide to move, simply because the chaos is the the default setting for R-selected species. This creates conflict. Conflict situation arises simply because R-selected group, due to its low IQ, cannot conceptualize and formulate any other response rather than a brute force and the force is the only mean of communication that Muslim understands. Other characteristic of R-selected behavior is that it doesn't produce anything of new value, yet it only consumes while fanatically preserving its basic values. That is why you have no go zones, sharia law controlled zones, rapes, murders, honor killings etc. If it wasn't like that, all these migrants would fill up the schools, learning the languages and acquiring new skills, but since it is like that, all they do is rape, rob and proudly display their hive mind type of behavior saturated in most obscene acts of aggression, that Europeans see as pure barbarism. Which is what exactly what it is and what it always has been.

                    So Erdogan will use the completely justified resentment towards Muslims to steer up the hive mind collectivism in Turkey. This will give the energy for the Turkish nationalism and religious fanaticism to rise. As it rises, nationalism will slowly give its way to religious fanaticism, it will be used as bridge between, uncomfortable shedding of values of the West, that Turkey "embraced" due to Ataturk's rule. So as Kemalism fades away, Erdoganism will step in but it is only a transition towards true nature of Turkey, which is Ottoman Empire which again is just a tip of the iceberg called dar ul Islam. However, in order for Islam to succeed in this game, West and Russia needs to annihilate themselves, so it is only logical to assume that Turkey will filp flops between two sides. It is in its interest to do so, because it can only gain, while both West and Russia will lose with each turn. Since Turkey only receives and West and Russia only invest, its success is assured.
                    Europeans see only Russia as the arch enemy and will use everything against it. Russia, due to its deeply rooted sense of inferiority, wants to prove itself that it is not a threat as it wants to be westernized and will use all of its resources to prove that.

                    So, pretty much that is it. Both Russia and West will feed the Islam until they will have nothing to feed it with. Than when they are both weak and hungry, Islam will simply eat them. I mean, Afghanistan is the purest example of this.

                    For us, in the Balkans, we never bought the story of "transformation" of Turkey as the memory of Ottoman conquest is integral part of our identity. We were dhimmies and we know what the word kufar means, as we experienced it first hand. We know what Islam is and what it does. We see it coming and rising again and we are not comfortable with it. However, Islam is not the thing that we are uncomfortable with, we know what it is, we understand it and we acknowledge it. Problem is that our elites are subjects to European union, whom doesn't know what Islam is and wants to convince us that their ignorance is the knowledge that we should embrace and treat our historical experience as ignorance.

                    Serbia and Serbs, were never parts of Crusades and we never invaded the Middle East. It was vice versa.

                    Operationally, I think that it will go something like this.

                    Out of fear of Russain expansion, the west and the middle east will support Muslims in the Balkans in their effort to "solve" problems, which means ethnic cleansing of Serbs. West and the middle east don't see any moral problem with it, for the west and their "fortress under siege" mentality we lie outside of walls of civilization and thus we are irrelevant. For the Middle East, the mantra is that we shouldn't exist as our very existence is an insult to theirs. So pretty much we are between two blocks that want to eradicate us. Russia in its feeling of lower value, doesn't want to help us either as it wants to be the part of the west but on its own terms, which is something that west doesn't want to hear. With the support from the outside, Muslims in the Balkans will become more aggressive and hostile, they will use their victim status that they have been building so carefully and use it as an excuse for action. Pretty much, it will start in Kosovo, than move to Montenegro catching up the Sanjak region and finally come to Bosnia. With the army in tow, the unlimited number of fedayeen, mujahedins and sehid's pouring in, in the form of migrants, man power is not the issue. Add to that a couple of high tech gadgets from the West, in form of intelligence, black ops and victory is assured. The shapes of that conflict are forming as we speak and the hour is near.
                    Last edited by Versus; 17 Mar 17,, 11:23.


                    • But don't get me wrong, I don't hate Islam and I don't blame it for its existence or actions. I blame men, for not being able to see trough the lie of feminists and how stupid we were to believe them that what they say is what they want. The true reason why all this is happening is gynocentrism and women's nature. I am just amazing with their ways and how they are able to be so convincing in lying.


                      • So, what does your mother say about that?


                        • Originally posted by kato View Post
                          So, what does your mother say about that?
                          I live among them Kato, I work in the area known as Serbian Calas and I live with Lybian "refugees"...Add to that my deployment, so yeah... But, never mind. Today's Erdogan's statements confirm what I said.

                          Last edited by Versus; 17 Mar 17,, 18:15.


                          • Originally posted by Versus View Post
                            Logical relativism and especially when placed in a progressive context, laid ground for formation of radical ideas, such as communism. Because according to it, everything that existed in the past, is automatically rendered obsolete and therefore useless and irrelevant. Non existent but in a longer term, damaging aka bad. This stance can be clearly seen in our case, with the Karl Marx, whom advocated political genocide against us, while we were still Ottoman subjects, whom also had similar ideas but from a different part of the spectrum. Relativism can be also found in a ideologies of fascism and Nazism...
                            This is wrong. Logical positivism came from the Vienna Circle, spread to England and the US (Quine is quite brilliant in my view) and is more or less a theory of meaning. Freddie Ayer's "Language, Truth and Logic" (lp in it's most vehement stance in England) denies that moral statements have 'meaning' in that they cannot be proved to be correct or incorrect. For them for someone to say "the moon is made of cheese" had 'meaning' because it was potentially "verifiable" (the word Ayer uses). Moral statements being "unverifiable" have no "logical meaning". It was an attempt to link science to logic in it's basis and for fairly obvious reasons was clearly wrong. However from that came Popper and Wittgenstein so it was an intellectual path to a better future (depending on your view). For the logical positivists to argue that moral statements have no 'meaning' is very distant leap to say they helped the rise of absolutist theories where certain moral "virtues" (or behaviour) are absolutely right and others absolutely wrong: Nor did they argue that the past was "irrelevant" but rather must be seen in context; relatively. It is the opposite. Nazism is derived from Hegelian 'Theory of the State" as as was Communism; An individual's "supreme duty is to be a member of the state." Logical positivism was a relatively obscure set of ideas of the Vienna Circle - Mises of 'Austrian economics' was part of it too; a case could be made that Einstein derived the intellectual basis of his thought from relativsim. Wittgenstein - certainly in the philosophical realm - went far further and made the positivist view absurd. It is just absurd to claim that relativism leads to absolutism and I am not a relativist in even logical, let alone moral regards.
                            Last edited by snapper; 18 Mar 17,, 06:04.


                            • Originally posted by snapper View Post
                              Nazism is derived from Hegelian 'Theory of the State" as as was Communism
                              Actually while Marx and Engels were Hegelians in their youth, they later rejected Hegel's idealism in constructing their concepts, instead picking and evolving Feuerbach's materialistic theorems. Marx still credits Hegel in Capital given that this was a continuous evolvement with Hegel at the source; however he also stated that Hegel's dialectics needed to be "turned upside down" to discover the kernel of truth behind their mysticism.


                              • Getting confrontational following the Turkish-German-Dutch tiff:

                                German foreign intelligence chief Bruno Kahl has given an interview for Spiegel in which he states that the BND does not "see any Gülen movement involvement in the coup", that "the Gülen movement does not constitute any sort of islamist or terrorist group" and that "the purges by Erdogan's government in Turkey, if not with the same radicality, would have happened anyway".

                                The same Spiegel issue also has an interview with new foreign minister Sigmar Gabriel stating that Turkey can pretty much forget about EU membership, that "Erdogan doesn't care for that anyway", and that - given Brexit - the future relationship between the EU and the UK could serve as a blueprint for equivalent treatment of Turkey (... which is more of a hint at how we'll treat the UK than the other way around). This interview is partially party politics though, given the incoming election in Germany, and gives Gabriel - along with similar voices from designate chancellor candidate Martin Schulz and SPD parliamentary chief Thomas Oppermann - an opportunity to distance themselves from Merkel's mollycoddling of Turkey (and... others).