Turkey coup

[Avani]

if you read well what I've written you'll read that I've writen that she has the right to express her opinion. and fight for it in a legal way, as long as she respects the decision of the majority and goes by their rules as long as they are the majority (obeying the law of the country)

I don't know if in Turkey the minorities are oppressed, if so then it is the peoples task to take down the government, not the army's task. if they let the army do that they will end in a country in wich the army thinks it is the almighty god juging and practicing the truth.
army men are not meant to REAAD, nor to LEAAAD (as simpson's shwarzenegeer says read and lead hhhh) they are dangerous and have to be kept under control

I am not talking about the army and rest of your argument with her. I was referring to your statement regarding majority rights in democracy. You simply dodged the question.

 

[nefraiko]

I am not talking about the army and rest of your argument with her. I was referring to your statement regarding majority rights in democracy. You simply dodged the question.

no I didn't dodge, if the majority oppresses the minority then it is not a democracy and should be overthrown, not by the army but by the people. I hope I'm clear this time.

 

[paratise]

no I didn't dodge, if the majority oppresses the minority then it is not a democracy and should be overthrown, not by the army but by the people. I hope I'm clear this time.

How the hell an oppressed minority will overthrow an oppressive majority with institutional power at its side? The "people" will be against it.

Like you admitted you have no idea about this country so idk why you think you can dictate how democratic changes should occur here...It does not make sense.

 

[nefraiko]

How the hell an oppressed minority will overthrow an oppressive majority with institutional power at its side? The "people" will be against it.

Like you admitted you have no idea about this country so idk why you think you can dictate how democratic changes should occur here...It does not make sense.

if the majority of the people are happy with the established system the minority has no right to overthrow this system illegally. if we admit that they succeed then they will impose their will to the majority. that is not right.

I'm talking about general concepts here, applyable everywhere. you have a vision of the world and you want to impose your vision to the majority even if you know that in your contry this vision is adopted only by a minority.
in summary you want that YOUR vision be applied and you don't care about the other that constitute the majority that you consider not worth of applying their vision even if they are many and do it legally, because you don't share this vision.

you are ok with the fact that some terrorists apply your vision by force over the majority of the turkish people.

that doesn't sound right to me.

I know I've made horrible spelling mistakes

 

[dark legion]

I just noticed how many analysts, battle strategists showed up these days
with full intel about who started coup, why, "america behind this",he is a dictator(believing all what is written),kurds, terrorism ,WWIII,

 

[Xlad]

It is likely that coup might be staged.

Erdogan and Binali called people to streets to resist coup and shit. They will be victims again boo hoo.

There is too many information flowing. Some channels are working; the govt. channel is taken over by military but other pro govt ones say people are resisting the coup (people being erdogan's fans).

Too much thing to absorb here. I am sorry thati can not give a sufficient info, so far it is forbidden to go out.


There is too much to say about military's influence in Turkey but all i am gonna say is:
1) Modern secular Turkey was found by military members while Ottoman dynasty was pimping our lands to invaders. Ever since, military is more or less seen as guarantee for secularism and unity.

2) There were several military coups through history, esp. the one in 1960 and 98(not really a coup but eh) are done to due to preserve secularism (along with other reasons).

3) Erdogan's government was arresting military members for years because there may be an attempt to coup. People have very negative experiences with 1980 coup and many religious people dislike secularist attempts so govt. came through after years of hollowing the military.

Now a "coup" the ace in the hole is getting played.

Too much to think but nothing we can do. This is what we are as millions of opposition in Turkey.

Forget Turk vs Kurd, Sunni vs Shia, Rich vs poor etc. whatever dichtomy they made you believe this country has. The most major dichtomy in this country is seculars vs bigots.

This shit is definitely staged from the look of things. Most of the soldiers appeared to be young conscripts who don't know shit of what's going on. Plus, a real coup would definitely have deployed much more forces. Either way, Erdogank must be removed since he is definitely pushing Turkey into an Islamic dictatorship.

 

[HashiraMadara]

Then they question why they aren't part of the EU.

ehhhh England left EU... I wonder

 

[Reboryushon]

ehhhh England left EU... I wonder

Idiots voted for England to leave the EU. Get your facts straight, the future of the UK is not made by the elders that mass voted to leave, it is made of the youngsters that voted to stay but since the birth pyramid is inverted in most Europe, elders still have a defining weight in the decisive moments.

 

[nefraiko]

it's funny how people begin to say that the turke's coup is made by erdogan and believe from the bottom of their heart that the 9/11 wasn't made by the government and that the nice attack was aldo the work of islamist terrorists.

it's even funnier that before the coup's faiillure, people were supporting it hhhhhhh
now it failed they say the coup is bad and that erdogan made it

 

[Avani]

it's funny how people begin to say that the turke's coup is made by erdogan and believe from the bottom of their heart that the 9/11 wasn't made by the government and that the nice attack was aldo the work of islamist terrorists.

it's even funnier that before the coup's faiillure, people were supporting it hhhhhhh
now it failed they say the coup is bad and that erdogan made it

Do you believe 9/11 was an inside job?

 

[nefraiko]

Do you believe 9/11 was an inside job?

no, but I don't believe it was made by terrorists eather...
how the **** I'm I supposed to know hein ?

 

[HashiraMadara]

it's funny how people begin to say that the turke's coup is made by erdogan and believe from the bottom of their heart that the 9/11 wasn't made by the government and that the nice attack was aldo the work of islamist terrorists.

it's even funnier that before the coup's faiillure, people were supporting it hhhhhhh
now it failed they say the coup is bad and that erdogan made it

Look at the naivetés above you. The guy who quoted me is a solidified media product

 

[HashiraMadara]

no, but I don't believe it was made by terrorists eather...
how the **** I'm I supposed to know hein ?

If they think Osama played a part in 9/11, I give up on the world

 

[nefraiko]

Look at the naivetés above you. The guy who quoted me is a solidified media product

yes...I agree, there are many of them, smiling and happy.

 

[Avani]

no, but I don't believe it was made by terrorists eather...
how the **** I'm I supposed to know hein ?

So you are accusing others of behaving the same way as you are doing yourself...

 

[nefraiko]

So you are accusing others of behaving the same way as you are doing yourself...

and how ecactly I'm I behaving ? I don't understand your accusation

 

[Avani]

Look at the naivetés above you. The guy who quoted me is a solidified media product

As if you are not. It's just a mater of which media you are choosing to believe.

 

[nefraiko]

So you are accusing others of behaving the same way as you are doing yourself...

in case yu didn't understand what i said earlier. I was accusing people of being selectively sceptical. if someone is going to be sceptical about media, he does it with every occurence.
i'm not selectively sceptical.
I was also accusing some folks of contradicting behaviour.

 

[Avani]

it's funny how people begin to say that the turke's coup is made by erdogan and believe from the bottom of their heart that the 9/11 wasn't made by the government and that the nice attack was aldo the work of islamist terrorists.

it's even funnier that before the coup's faiillure, people were supporting it hhhhhhh
now it failed they say the coup is bad and that erdogan made it

Do you believe 9/11 was an inside job?

no, but I don't believe it was made by terrorists eather...
how the **** I'm I supposed to know hein ?

So you are accusing others of behaving the same way as you are doing yourself...

and how ecactly I'm I behaving ? I don't understand your accusation

....Right.

in case yu didn't understand what i said earlier. I was accusing people of being selectively sceptical. if someone is going to be sceptical about media, he does it with every occurence.
i'm not selectively sceptical.
I was also accusing some folks of contradicting behaviour.

That's fine. But you failed to notice you are in the same boat on that point.

 

[HashiraMadara]

As if you are not. It's just a mater of which media you are choosing to believe.

Media scheme you say?
Believe? What is belief? What prompts someone to believe something? What is my source of Information? Do I even follow media? You over looked all of that...

Let's debunk a few things:

Who discovered the Americans? One will be quick to say: Columbus. A nosey person might point the Viking Erikson. Rarely you would find 1 pointing at Abu Bakr Musa.

"Ivan van Sertima formerly of Rutgers University, and Malian researcher Gaoussou Diawara, proposed that Abu Bakr II traveled to the New World.[4][5]

Most archaeologists, anthropologists, ethnohistorians, linguists, and other modern pre New World.[citation needed] For views representative of this point of view, see the considerations on the question advanced in Haslip-Viera et al. (1997), who for example note "no genuine African artifact has ever been found in a controlled archaeological excavation in the New World". See also the supporting responses in peer-review printed in the article, by David Browman, Michael D. Coe, Ann Cyphers, Peter Furst, and other academics active in the field. Ortiz de Montellano et al. (1997, passim.) continues the case against Africa-Americas contacts. Other prominent Mesoamerican specialists such as UCR Riverside anthropology professor Karl Taube are confident that "There simply is no material evidence of any Pre-Hispanic contact between the Old World and Mesoamerica before the arrival of the Spanish in the sixteenth century".[6]
A BBC article titled "Africa's greatest explorer", summarizes the controversy from the perspectives of the scholars and historians in Mali"

Looking above you see a level of discretions between well trusted sources. Abu being systematically denied any relevance...

You go along to ask about what caused 9/11:

"THE DAY ITSELF – EVIDENCE OF COMPLICITY

1) AWOL Chain of Command
a. It is well documented that the officials topping the chain of command for response to a domestic attack – George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Myers, Montague Winfield, Ralph Eberhart – all found reason to do something else during the actual attacks, other than assuming their duties as decision-makers.
b. Who was actually in charge? **** Cheney, Richard Clarke, Norman Mineta and the 9/11 Commission directly conflict in their accounts of top-level response to the unfolding events, such that several (or all) of them must be lying.

2) Air Defense Failures
a. The US air defense system failed to follow standard procedures for responding to diverted passenger flights.
b. Timelines: The various responsible agencies – NORAD, FAA, Pentagon, USAF, as well as the 9/11 Commission – gave radically different explanations for the failure (in some cases upheld for years), such that several officials must have lied; but none were held accountable.
c. Was there an air defense standdown?

3) Pentagon Strike
How was it possible the Pentagon was hit 1 hour and 20 minutes after the attacks began? Why was there no response from Andrews Air Force Base, just 10 miles away and home to Air National Guard units charged with defending the skies above the nation’s capital? How did Hani Hanjour, a man who failed as a Cessna pilot on his first flight in a Boeing, execute a difficult aerobatic maneuver to strike the Pentagon? Why did the attack strike the just-renovated side, which was largely empty and opposite from the high command?

4) Wargames
a. US military and other authorities planned or actually rehearsed defensive response to all elements of the 9/11 scenario during the year prior to the attack – including multiple hijackings, suicide crashbombings, and a strike on the Pentagon.
b. The multiple military wargames planned long in advance and held on the morning of September 11th included scenarios of a domestic air crisis, a plane crashing into a government building, and a large-scale emergency in New York. If this was only an incredible series of coincidences, why did the official investigations avoid the issue? There is evidence that the wargames created confusion as to whether the unfolding events were “real world or exercise.” Did wargames serve as the cover for air defense sabotage, and/or the execution of an “inside job”?

5) Flight 93
Did the Shanksville crash occur at 10:06 (according to a seismic report) or 10:03 (according to the 9/11 Commission)? Does the Commission wish to hide what happened in the last three minutes of the flight, and if so, why? Was Flight 93 shot down, as indicated by the scattering of debris over a trail of several miles?

THE DAY – POSSIBLE SMOKING GUNS

6) Did cell phones work at 30,000 feet in 2001? How many hijackings were attempted? How many flights were diverted?

7) Demolition Hypothesis
What caused the collapse of a third skyscraper, WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane? Were the Twin Towers and WTC 7 brought down by explosives? (See “The Case for Demolitions,” the websites wtc7.net and 911research.wtc7.net, and the influential article by physicist Steven Jones. See also items no. 16 and 24, below.)[See Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth]

FOREKNOWLEDGE & THE ALLEGED HIJACKERS

8) What did officials know? How did they know it?
a. Multiple allied foreign agencies informed the US government of a coming attack in detail, including the manner and likely targets of the attack, the name of the operation (the “Big Wedding”), and the names of certain men later identified as being among the perpetrators.
b. Various individuals came into possession of specific advance knowledge, and some of them tried to warn the US prior to September 11th.
c. Certain prominent persons received warnings not to fly on the week or on the day of September 11th.

9) Able Danger, Plus – Surveillance of Alleged Hijackers
a. The men identified as the 9/11 ringleaders were under surveillance for years beforehand, on the suspicion they were terrorists, by a variety of US and allied authorities – including the CIA, the US military’s “Able Danger” program, the German authorities, Israeli intelligence and others.
b. Two of the alleged ringleaders who were known to be under surveillance by the CIA also lived with an FBI asset in San Diego, but this is supposed to be yet another coincidence.

10) Obstruction of FBI Investigations prior to 9/11
A group of FBI officials in New York systematically suppressed field investigations of potential terrorists that might have uncovered the alleged hijackers – as the Moussaoui case once again showed. The stories of Sibel Edmonds, Robert Wright, Coleen Rowley and Harry Samit, the “Phoenix Memo,” David Schippers, the 199i orders restricting investigations, the Bush administration’s order to back off the Bin Ladin family, the reaction to the “Bojinka” plot, and John O’Neil do not, when considered in sum, indicate mere incompetence, but high-level corruption and protection of criminal networks, including the network of the alleged 9/11 conspirators. (Nearly all of these examples were omitted from or relegated to fleeting footnotes in /11 Commission Report.)"

You then leave to ask did we really land on the moon or it was a gigantic billions worth movie?
You then dig it out for your self. Out of the different researches you persued you reach a level 5: Noticing the pattern to info that gets lost and leaves gap holes in the history of this world.


Most media products like him end at level 2. With government throwing a shade of "democracy" at the faces of "Knowledgeable" ones. Even you are not worth me breaking the levels down for your comprehension when you're still a victim of "freedom of choice"