![]() |
|
Spaces home SokSa LairPhotosProfileFriendsMore ![]() | ![]() |
SokSa LairNaka Ima
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Turkish VillageI've come across this amazing article today. Pay attention to the date: 1965; to my amusement, it is still valid, true to the letter and quite insightful. I enjoyed it throughly, mostly because - I think - it aligns well with my way of comprehension and my own experiences. I do not, however, think that it is "personal" or "subjective" in its depiction of Turkey, Anatalia and the village life. I find it very comprehensive and accurate. This is a must read for anybody interested in the socio-economic and socio-politic fabric of Turkey; urban and rural.
Cheerios
-Icy
"...
Villagers frequently talk about law, kanun, usually in the course of explaining institutions or behaviour, or in arguments about rights. These references imply a finality; the law is the law and that is that. On the other hand they know that the law is often ignored in the villages, and are not impressed when an opponent uses law as an argument. `Kanun manun yok köyde, there is no law and all that stuff in the village' one of the men of Sakaltutan once remarked.
In fact, of course, the law affects the villages profoundly and in many ways. The main obvious impact is threefold. First, administrative law and regulations, and especially the Village Law, sets out the formal arrangements for village institutions and for relations between village and state. Secondly, the villagers are frequently charged in the criminal courts, mainly for breaches of the peace and acts of violence. Thirdly, rights to land can only be finally decided by the civil courts. As I have shown z] (p. 209) the effect of those parts of the Civil Code that govern marriage and the family have at present almost no bearing on the village.
Turkish Village
Copyright 1965, 1994 Paul Stirling. All rights reserved.
..."
Click here to read the entire article by Paul Stirling on the web site of Univercity of Kent at Canterburry, UK. Excellent HistoryA very well written article on the History of Turks, Ottomans, Arabs and the region in general.
Although I no longer enjoy discussing the issue with anybody, I still feel obliged to relay articles that are well prepared, thought and researched, as they pop infront of me out of nowhere. This is one such article. It's quite long and meticulously well prepared. I am extracting the "hot topic" issue part, to which I have given a lot of space in this blog with references and bibliographia. As I said, I am disgusted at its current state, the way both sides argue it and the rest of the world act the idiotic herd of sheep. Don't forget: "History belongs to people who write it", and "the victor lives to tell the story". Enjoy. And please, don't buy everything you read, see, hear. Do a research on your own accord, with all this wealth of information, none of us has the luxury to be so poor.
Cheers.
- icy
<quote begin>
Still Standing for Islam - and Against Terrorism By Mustafa Akyol FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, October 08, 2004 Armenian Genocide?
Mr. Bostom speaks about the Armenians, too. But in a different way. He writes about the "Armenian genocide committed by the Ottoman Turks during the initial two decades" of the 20th century, adding yet another link to his chain of evil.
But that is an argument by assertion. "Armenian genocide" is not an established historical fact, it is the "Armenian thesis" that some prominent historians such as Bernard Lewis find erroneous. The Turkish thesis is that there was not an extermination policy against the Armenian population of Turkey in 1915, as has been alleged, but rather the tragedy was mutual killing in war conditions. The slaughter of tens of thousands of Muslim (Kurdish and Turkish) civilians by the Armenian militias aligned with the invading Russian army gives credence to that assessment.
Justin McCarthy, professor of history at Louisville University, in his book titled Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922, documents this view. As historian Daniel Pipes well summarizes, McCarthy's book, "Puts into perspective the deportation of Armenians in 1915 and turns this from an act of hatred into one motivated by fear (had the Armenians, with Russian support, rebelled, Ottoman Muslims could have expected to be slaughtered)."
In his book, Justin McCarthy examines many of those incidents in which Armenian rebels killed local Muslim populations. During the Armenian revolt, which preceded the alleged "Armenian genocide," Everything Islamic in Van was destroyed. With the exception of three antique buildings, all the mosques were burned or torn down. The entire Muslim quarter was destroyed. When the Armenian work and the battle between Ottomans and Armenians were finished, Van more resembled an ancient ruin than a city . . . When the Armenians attacked Muslims' own villages or nearby villages, Muslims fled with whatever moveable property they could carry. On the road, Armenian bands first robbed them, then raped many of the women and killed many of the men. Usually, but not always, a number of women and young children were killed as well.[xv] In fact, "After the Armenian retreat, much of eastern Anatolia was a graveyard."[xvi]
What is called the "Armenian genocide" was partly the attacks of revenge on the Armenian population by local Turks and Kurds. That was indeed inter-communal violence. On the other hand, the decision by the Ottoman government to deport the Armenians in Eastern Turkey caused many deaths and that is horrible, but it was not a genocidal policy either. According to McCarthy, The Ottoman response to the Armenian Revolution was approximately the same as that taken by other twentieth-century governments faced with guerrilla war: isolate the guerrillas from local support by removing local supporters.[xvii] Thus, McCarthy concludes, "The blame for the deaths of Armenians in the convoys must be shared by the Ottomans -- shared with the Armenian revolutionaries and their supporters and with the Russians"[xviii] </quote end>
Click here to read the entire article (I highly recommend it. As I said, it is not limited to the issue above, nor Turks, neither Islam) Never ending "waiting for localhost" on FireFox bugI recently noticed a weird behavior of FireFox. On some pages that I've developed, the browser finishes loading, displays "Done" on the status bar, waits for a split second and switches to "Waiting for localhost" and stays in this state indefinitely. This effectively prevents the "onLoad" event to fire and there you are trying to figure out "what the hell is it still loading?". The behavior is non existent with Internet Explorer (7).
After a short search I have found out the below page. Explains the reason, with the possible solution. The diagnosis and the prognosis are the same. I'm putting it here for reference and few more keywords for search engines :)
Cheers all
http://geekswithblogs.net/bcaraway/archive/2007/08/24/114945.aspx "...When a certain ASPX page completed rendering and emitted it's final markup to the browser, I noticed the status bar read 'Done' for an instant, but then immediately changed to 'Waiting for localhost...' again. It definitely seemed as if the page was being requested twice. I immediately looked at FireBug to see what was loading, and indeed the same page showed up twice in the 'Net' listing. To see it in action, I ran the site in DEBUG mode and put a break on Page_Load. Sure enough, the page WAS being requested twice. IE(7) worked just fine. It was not behaving in this odd manner, so I set out to figure out what was causing this strange behavior in Firefox..." David Crook | Billie JeanDavid Cook is one of the finalists of American Idol. But never mind that. The links below point to an acoustic cover version of Billie Jean (Michael Jackson).
This version is composed by Chris Cornell (Soundgarden, Audioslave) and was released on his solo album "Unplugged in Sweden". It is by far, the best alternative cover version of this song I have ever heard in my life. It has an amazing flow, an incredible structure. Now, the interesting thing is David Crook sings it better than Chris Cornell; David has an awesome studio voice. I have no idea if he won AI or whether he is still singing or not, frankly I don't even give a crap. Of course, Chris Cornell is a semi-god, which makes him an angel I suppose, or a half-deamon at best. Maybe a troll, he does resemble one :))
The "original" acoustic live cover of Chris Cornell (studio recording):
David Cook's version (studio recording):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUfbLtZHrog&feature=related Chris covered this song because he was trying to show his wife what the "art of covering a song" is all about: reinventing, bringing something new, changing, shifting staying true to the original but making the song on your own at the same time. His wife said "I don't get it, do a song and show it to me". So, Chris went and dug up Billie Jean.
For those who are also interested, Billie Jean (the original) is a very interesting song, in almost all aspects. It is the first "real" video clip, it is almost perfect in all technical points (recording, mixing, the song structure, melody, rhythm, instrument usage) and is widely regarded as the best song written after 1980. It also has a very interesting story, here's an excerpt: "... Michael Jackson and Epic Records had planned to present the music video for the song to the executives of newly-formed cable network MTV, which was at the time not playing videos by black performers or even dance artists. Since its inception, the network's playlist was predominantly white and mainly featured videos by the top rock artists of the day such as Duran Duran, Peter Gabriel, The Clash, Blondie, Journey, Pat Benatar, Genesis, and Billy Idol. In 1983, Jackson and CBS Records President Walter Yetnikoff informed MTV's President that if the cable channel didn't play Jackson's video, CBS would not allow them to play any of their white artists who were getting exposure on the network (most notably Ozzy Osbourne and Billy Joel), and would denounce them publicly as racists. With that ultimatum, MTV finally bowed to pressure and premiered Jackson's "Billie Jean" video on March 10, 1983. This account was disputed by Les Garland, co-founder and originator of MTV, VH1, and The Box, saying "I called Bob (Pittman, MTV co-founder) to tell him, 'I just saw the greatest video I've ever seen in my life. It is off the dial it's so good.' We added it that day. How (the myth) turned into a story literally blew our minds." ..." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billie_Jean
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|