A video message from Ataturk to American People

Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914

Quote

Topic: A video message from Ataturk to American People
Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 14:03

Originally posted by Mortaza

He said " court should not be neutral" and you still talk about neutrality.

Where did he say that, where is the source indicating that he said that, and in which context, I mean about what exactly he said that...Without knowing these it is impossible to comment

Originally posted by Mortaza

How do you know? It is a know fact he has double standards. Different for him and different for others..

??? He cannot be a president anymore so how can it be claimed that he is rejecting the law for his own benefit

Originally posted by Mortaza

He said(before his election) power of president is more than enough and He abused that power(No president before him abused that power so much.)

It is no secret that 82 Constitution gives extensive powers to presidents. But how did he exactly abused that power? Maybe you are mixing him with Ozal, who accepted every single law that his party was sending from the parliament; not only the laws but also approving the KHKs(Decree in effect of law) in an abusing way.

Originally posted by Mortaza

I think I give enough example. I am not even talking about his dirty games about the law (people election of president.)

Yes, CHP and kemalists are lucky because of him. Turkey is absolute not. CHP and Army say, He do..

Constant usage of CHP-Kemalist bla bla like a chewing gum, but nothing solid yet...It is quite clear why the people's election of the president shall be rejected. The system in Turkey is not suitable for this because it is dualist. In America, or in France, for example it might quite normal because the presidential system is very different out there.

Originally posted by Mortaza

Pardon me? are we talking about our Turkey? Which banned every langauge except Turkish, which banned alevi praying places. which banned headscarf. Which harrassed christian minorities? I am sure you have no idea about what is traditional Turkey.

Turban is totally a different issue and it has been discussed before...It was abused. It is not banned everywhere, it is banned in public institutions.

Harassment of minorities remained in far past. Today it is consisting of individual deeds.

There are some violations of liberties but things are getting better.

These are the "ideals" of the Turkish state, some still can not be achieved.But they are trying to be violated by some, many political parties who came to power in the past done that.

Originally posted by Mortaza

Wow, what a success. We won war against mighty ROC.

It was an amphibious assault and was a very hard operation...Not a matter of size or anything

Originally posted by Mortaza

Anyway, We already know, Who tortured kurds and forced them to rebellion at 1980.

Many were tortured after 1980, not just Kurds or X or Y.

Originally posted by Mortaza

Realy what about 28 Subat? Thank God, AKP worked well. Last coup(which happened 2 month ago) did not destroyed our economy.

Go read the definition of a coup...There was nothing that would destroy the economy...Economy only gets destroyed when it is brought to such a level.And we are getting close to the perilous years, even though a soap opera condition is presented in front of us.

We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli

Seko

Emperor

Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 14:07

This discourse has reached a high water mark especially with the upcoming elections in Turkey. AKP has been the majority party. It's also the most pro American party in the history of Turkish politics. One of the consequences is that the US can and does manipulate Turkey to her wishes as she feels fit. The European Union will always create excuses from membership. All the AKP does is exasperate problems by not accepting such issues. In the past there was rarely a "Turban" rpoblem for women. It was just unheard of. It's popular now. I wonder why and to whose value it is? The Kurdish battles are as heated as ever. Turkish citizens are fed up with the status quo. The CHP has been Turkeys founding party yet is led by an unpopular leader. The MHP is too nationalistic to fit the popular agenda. I am favoring the upstart HYP (Halk Yukselis Party, aka - Peoples Ascent Party). They are not left or right or religiously extreme. Yasar Nuri Ozturk is a straight talker.

Kapikulu

Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 14:09

Originally posted by Feanor

Isn't that symbolic? I think the army is responsible to TBMM as a whole, not just government.

The Council of Ministers are responsible to TBMM...Not the army. Army chief of staff uses his commanding capacities on behalf of the president and responsible towards president, AFAIK.

Edited by Kapikulu - 25-Jun-2007 at 14:15

We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli

Kapikulu

Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 14:12

Originally posted by Seko

Great analysis, Seko...

I sympathize with HYP too, however, they don't hold any chance.

And additionally, the farmers, villagers, retired people, are crying due to falling life standards and income but their voices are, unfortunately, not heard.

We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli

Lmprs

Arch Duke

Joined: 30-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1869

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 14:42

Originally posted by Seko

In the past there was rarely a "Turban" problem for women. It was just unheard of. It's popular now.

Because our Islamist bourgeoisie was formed in relatively recent past.

Beylerbeyi View Drop Down

Chieftain

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 14:44

1) It is not the executive organ who elects the president, but it is the legislative organ.

You know, the executive organ controls 2/3s of the legislative organ. They have enough people to change the constitution. So at the present the executive organ practially elects the president.

However kemalofascists cheated. Thanks to those idiots in the military and the judiciary the parliament will never be able to elect a president in Turkey from now on. And what's more they also prevent the people from electing the president. Because they know they will never win a popular vote.

There is only one way out of this crises. The Military should appoint the President. Or what's better, the Chief of Staff can become the President at the same time. Like Evren in 1980. :)

2) Constitution did not bring a clear procedure for the exact number of representatives who shall be present in the assembly during the selection of the President. The dispute was that. From where you had got that 330 would be enough information? It is wrong.

A lot of presidents were elected without this rule until today. Nobody even thought of protesting because it is idiotic. 367 votes are required in the first two trials, but in the third 330 votes are enough (I heard this from RTE), or it can be less.

CHP came up with this idiotic idea which any neutral court would have thrown out. But as you complain, in Turkey courts are nothing but neutral. They are tools of the kemalofascist establishment, led by the military.

This was just a dirty trick, and you know it as well as we do.

3) If you take a look at how the administrative cases regarding the forceful location changes of polices, clerks, people in state duty, and how the sympathizers of a certain party gets into influential positions in judicial organs and positions, it is not so hard to see what's going on between executive organ and the judicial organ. Even judges are insecure and get certain "sanctions" when they give a decision coinciding the will of executive organ. This is a problem of Turkey for many many years, in fact.

Yes, we saw what happened in the presidential election. The court was really pro-government... Stop lying to yourself. The courts do what the military tells them to do.

Thank God the Supreme Judiciary Organs are not yet under the effect of executive power. I was talking about the ordinary judiciary organs.

There is only one judiciary organ, composed of different courts. And all courts are controlled by the military in Turkey.

The Council of Ministers are responsible to TBMM...Not the army. Army chief of staff uses his commanding capacities on behalf of the president and responsible towards president, AFAIK.

Chief of staff is responsible to the Prime Minister not to the President. So, when RTE tells YB to do something YB should shut up and do it.

Also, AKP is less pro-American than the Military. They are both pro-American but the Military is worse. One example, when Hamas won the elections, AKP called one of their leaders to Turkey. But during Israel-Hezbollah war, TSK and US sent weapons to Israel from the Incirlik airbase.

Edited by Beylerbeyi - 25-Jun-2007 at 15:13

Kapikulu

Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 14:58

Originally posted by Beylerbeyi

This was just a dirty trick, and you know it as well as we do.

Let me tell what exactly is going on...

330 is the number of votes Ozal was elected at the time. That was what RTE is talking about.

Nobody took it to the Constitutional Court at the time, and Constitutional Court does not work by itself. Authorized officials shall apply(it is 110 representatives in this case) so that it can examine the situation. At the time Ozal was selected, nobody applied and naturally, Constitutional Court did not examine. Now there was an application and it is examined.

I think it is not a weird or dirty idea and it is within line of constitution, as I explained before.

How can you seek for the vote of 2/3 of the representatives without even having 2/3 of the representatives in the parliament?

That is why the first tour was cancelled

Yes, we saw what happened in the presidential election. The court was really pro-government... Stop lying to yourself. The courts do what the military tells them to do.

There is only one judiciary organ, composed of different courts. And all courts are controlled by the military in Turkey.

As I said, I was talking about Supreme Judiciary Courts...They are not taken over by the government as their members are not selected by the government...(I didn't use the word "organ" in meaning of a "power")..

Military has its own judiciary organs, they are effective out there, but in the rest, it is strange to come up with a thesis saying "all courts are controlled by military"...

We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli

Beylerbeyi View Drop Down

Chieftain

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 15:24

I wrote that after the first 2 meetings, the necessary number to elect the president becomes lower than 367, more than 50%, if I am not mistaken. That's why AKP was confident, they fail first 2 times, and elect the third time.

How can you seek for the vote of 2/3 of the representatives without even having 2/3 of the representatives in the parliament?

This has happened thousands of times in the parliament, and not just about election of the president. So stop acting like it never hapened before. But nobody took it to the court. It was a house rule in the parliament that in this case the meeting is not cancelled and is valid.

They took it this time, because the military didn't want the AKP to elect the president. It was all dirty tricks, and everybody knows it.

From now on, all presidential elections will create a political crisis in Turkey, thanks to the idiotic kemalofascists, since no party other than AKP is likely to have more than 367 members.

Kapikulu

Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 17:33

Originally posted by Beylerbeyi

Yes, but then the problem of "Number of Representatives Present in the Assembly during the First Tour Election" came out, and the rest of the story.

They took it this time, because the military didn't want the AKP to elect the president. It was all dirty tricks, and everybody knows it.

From now on, all presidential elections will create a political crisis in Turkey, thanks to the idiotic kemalofascists, since no party other than AKP is likely to have more than 367 members.

This happened just once in history during the election of �zal and nobody took it to Constitutional Court therefore he was elected.

For other instances, like ordinary meetings for legislation, the number of Representatives that shall be present in the assembly is defined by the constitution(1/3 of the total-184), and apart from the fact that these are only single meetings(not with multiple rounds/tours), such a definition was not present for the election of president, as a weakness of the constitution, so this didn't happen for thousand times, and there is nothing dirty within the procedure.

Edited by Kapikulu - 25-Jun-2007 at 17:34

We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli

edgewaters View Drop Down

Sultan

Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 17:43

Originally posted by mamikon

I dont want to burst any bubbles but Turkey is a democracy? How many military coups has Turkey had so far? How many did US have?

I'm not going to weigh in on whether or not Turkey or the US is democratic, but "counting coups" (hehe) is a very poor reflection of the level of democracy a country might have.

For instance, virtually all the democratic institutions of the English-speaking countries - freedom of religion, representative government, etc - were developed as a series of responses to things like the Peasant Rebellions, the English Civil War, the capture of London by rebellious barons which led to the Magna Carta, and so on - even the American Revolution. Anglo-Saxon notions of democracy were literally built, brick by brick, through a series of sometimes bloody civil conflicts. If you look at England just prior to the French and American revolutions, it had been through more civil conflict than most other European nations, yet it had by far the most representative government of the lot.

Likewise, many totalitarian regimes feature such an impressive and powerful security apparatus, and occur in societies with strong notions of obedience to authority, that coups simply don't happen, ever. Communist China, for instance. Like the US it's only had one coup - the one that established it.

mamikon

Sultan

Joined: 16-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2200

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 18:57

Well yes of course you cant coup count, I just did not want to delve more into why I do not think Turkey is not a democracy (infact, of Turkey's neighbors I think only Greece is a democracy, and maybe Bulgaria by a stretch)

kurt

Consul

Joined: 17-Apr-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 358

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 19:21

Originally posted by Seko

AKP has been the majority party. It's also the most pro American party in the history of Turkish politics. One of the consequences is that the US can and does manipulate Turkey to her wishes as she feels fit.

I think that's a bit of an over statement. Remember before the Iraq war, America wanted to use turkish airspace to invade Iraq, and Paul wolfowitz announced it was definite that the turks would allow it, even though they opposed the idea of war there. Well that airspace hasn't been used, in case you didn't notice. Turkey is definitely manipulated by America but the extent to which does not see Turkish interests abandoned for American interests.

Bulldog

Caliph

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 19:52

Feonor

What about the inner politics of Turkey? Oh sure, it's all about evil foreigners.

There not "evil" foreigners, they are simply persuing their "interests".

Its totally naive to think that rivals in the region won't hesitate and dont' to try and destabilise Turkey, its even more naive to think Turkey wouldn't do the same to other rivals in the region if its in her interests and given the chance.

This isn't a "conspiracy" or some attempt to attack some neighbours and other countries. Its no secret that the Soviets, Greece, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Armenia have all at some time backed terrorism, tried to destabilise and cripple Turkey. Just like U.S was involved in backing movements against the Soviets and so forth.

These countries do what's in their "interests". It doesn't make them evil or heavenly.

Feonor

Sure, but in a socialist country the army must belong to the people, not just in words, of course.

What is the difference?

Everyone will do millitary service, everyone will be a soldier, millitary will be millitary of the masses.

This is the case in Turkey, most people have some relative somewhere in the army.

If Turkey becomes socialist, theocratic or any other system this won't change.

There is no perfect system, in my opinion the problem today is people are so caught up in believing their "ideology" is the "superior" that they comitt the ultimate ignorance which is disregarding all other ideas and not acknowledging their strenghts.

Every ideology has its strengths and advantages.

Socialism is directed at the masses, creating more socio-economic equality, reducing the poor-rich divide inequalities. Socialist regimes generally have achieved a good free state education and health systems. Their emphasis on infastructure, civic works, working together are great aspects of socialism.

etc etc

Only when we learn to appreciate different systems and create a balance incorporating their advantages and by changing them to suit the specific needs of a country and its unique conditions will better systems evolve.

Mortaza

It tested twice. Against ROC which a county 100 time small than Turkey, and against PKK(which army failed). I wont call it as invincible army..

Your missing the point.

I said the army has not been conquered.

The army goes back before the Republican era, the Ottomans, the Selcuks and so on, since the Turkish armies entered Anatolia they havn't been conquered by a non-Turk army (only Timur did and he was Turk).

Also, the amy hasn't failed against PKK, defeating a terrorist org is no easy task, its not a conventional war, the world's most powerfull army is having problems in Iraq.

Mortaza

I think army did biggest damage to Turkey. If we have such army, We dont need enemies.

You live in a dream world, you mix pollitics with emotions.

You may not need enemies but you have them that's the reality.

The only reason Turkey exists is its army, the only reason it will continue to exist is the army, the only way there will be democracy is army only way there will be shariah is army only way there will be socialism is army and if there is no army it will be just a matter of time before there is no Turkey

Mortaza

No thanks. I still prefer politicians to army. They did not harmed Turkey as army.

Its just a game, they have no real power.

In more powerfull democracies its just more discrete.

Polliticians harm Turkey more than anybody else

they're incapable, what have they done?

They create the pollitical scenario's which cause the army to have to sort out their mess.

If the polliticians had been sucessfull in convincing the Greek Cypriots that exterminating the Turkish Cypriots is wrong, the army wouldn't have had to enter to sort out the mess.

Edited by Bulldog - 25-Jun-2007 at 20:02

�What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.�
Albert Pine

Seko

Emperor

Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 20:39

Originally posted by kurt

Perhaps an understatement! I also forgot about the suspicious 'Green money" religious money filling the AKP's coffers.

Nothing wrong with having good relations with an existing ally over 50 odd years. The US and Turkey have an admirable history of trade and alliances over the years. However, a lack of leadership and the perplexity of the Bush administration has made Turkey rethink it's potential.

Let's not forget that the main reason the US didn't have rights to a staging ground for the invasion of Iraq was due to the newly formed AKP government's fledgling parliamentary constituents shooting down the offer in 2002. One that was accepted by their party leaders btw. Yes the majority of Turks did not want the war. Me too. However, the strings of attachment between Erdogan and the US put Turkey's interests at a standstill over the region.

The money laundering from rich middle easterners that support the AKP is the other point of contention I have. Foreign lobbies indiscretely back them with possibly billions of dollars. Money bolstering the AKP campaign and agenda, as well as the economy. Troublesome for now but potentially hazardous if undetected and eventually burdonesome when withdrawn. The AKP's agenda is the antithesis of secularism in my book. Nothing wrong with supporting the rural areas for support. Just don't bribe 'em for votes, fill local government offices with more nepotistic bearded cronies, or ignore the constitution.

Lmprs

Arch Duke

Joined: 30-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1869

Quote

Posted: 25-Jun-2007 at 22:16

Originally posted by Bulldog

There not "evil" foreigners, they are simply persuing their "interests". Its totally naive to think that rivals in the region won't hesitate and dont' to try and destabilise Turkey, its even more naive to think Turkey wouldn't do the same to other rivals in the region if its in her interests and given the chance. These countries do what's in their "interests". It doesn't make them evil or heavenly.

I was talking about how you perceived them and I laugh at your pathetic attempts to make a fool out of me.

Originally posted by Bulldog

What is the difference? Everyone will do millitary service, everyone will be a soldier, millitary will be millitary of the masses.This is the case in Turkey, most people have some relative somewhere in the�army. If Turkey becomes socialist, theocratic or any other system this won't change. There is no perfect system, in my opinion the problem today is people are so caught up in believing their "ideology" is the "superior" that they comitt the ultimate ignorance which is disregarding all other ideas and not acknowledging their strenghts. Every ideology has its strengths and advantages. Socialism is directed at the masses, creating more socio-economic equality, reducing the poor-rich divide inequalities. Socialist regimes generally have achieved a good free state education and health systems. Their emphasis on infastructure, civic works, working together are great aspects of socialism.

Obviously you don't know a thing about socialism, since you describe it as an economic program which you can embrace or abandon whenever you like. The whole thing is based on class warfare. In Turkey, the army, along with civil bureaucracy, is the ruling elite. Socialism can only be achieved by people, not some fascists who think they are leftists, just because they oppose Islamists.

Originally posted by Bulldog

Only when we learn to appreciate different systems and create a balance incorporating their advantages and by changing them to suit the specific needs of a country and its unique conditions will better systems evolve.

You mean three lashes for slaves instead of five? No, I say we free them.

Originally posted by Bulldog

I said the army has not been conquered. The army goes back before the Republican era, the Ottomans, the Selcuks and so on, since the Turkish armies entered Anatolia they havn't been conquered by a non-Turk army (only Timur did and he was Turk).

I no longer think are you are a Turkish nationalist in British disguise.

If you were, you wouldn't post such propaganda, you would knew that it would unmask you.

Edited by Feanor - 25-Jun-2007 at 22:35

Mortaza

Tsar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711

Quote

Posted: 26-Jun-2007 at 04:27

??? He cannot be a president anymore so how can it be claimed that he is rejecting the law for his own benefit

His time is finished but he is still president.

I will not discuss, Neutrality of Sezer any more. I am sure you can see how Sezer is neutral at AKP and CHP mitings. When CHP voters love Sezer more than Baykal(Because Sezer is neutral), AKP voters hate him(Because Sezer is neutral) I think people show their feeling about sezer neutrality.(Love of CHP voters and dislike of AKP voters)

It is interesting neutrality create such different feelings between people..

"Oysa demokratik devlet d�zeninde, ulusal iradeyi temsil eden parlamento disinda, sorumsuz bir cumhurbaskaninin y�netimi paylasmasi ve tek basina �nemli yetkiler kullanmasi kabul edilemez" said by sezer.

It is interesting he used that power as much as he can.

I should also add, Ozal did not reason any crises. Sezer reasoned a lot. His disrespect for parliment cannot acceptable.

Parliment cannot choose(is 367 suitable for Turkey or any country? is there any country which need 2/3 majority of electing president? Of course, You will choose to ignore this fact) People cannot choose. Pardon me? Who will choose president?

so Who will choose? Baykal? Army? Sezer?

So who is using a chewing gum? So what the hell we should do?

These are the "ideals" of the Turkish state, some still can not be achieved.But they are trying to be violated by some, many political parties who came to power in the past done that.

Political parties? Allahtan kork.(Be afraid from God)

Turkey was never a real democracy.Learn what is traditional Turkey.

Ideal traditional Turkey is, a nationalist(fasist), unreligious(not secular), and militaristic country.

Dont you find it interesting. People who are against traditional Turkey is generally, kurds, religious people and liberals and real leftists(Yes they dont like from AKP but They hate from coups.)

They want, freedom of ethnicity, freedom of religion and democracy..

Realy? Army forced Turkey another elections(with the help of NEUTRAL court) Army stoped election of president too.

So I am sure we can count this as a coup..

AKP has been the majority party. It's also the most pro American party in the history of Turkish politics. One of the consequences is that the US can and does manipulate Turkey to her wishes as she feels fit.

Please, biggest pro-american party in Turkey is Army. She cannot even do a coup without permission of USA.

n the past there was rarely a "Turban" rpoblem for women. It was just unheard of. It's popular now.

Because our Islamist bourgeoisie was formed in relatively recent past.

Well said. Also because Religious women begin to want to enter Univercities recently.

I am favoring the upstart HYP (Halk Yukselis Party, aka - Peoples Ascent Party).

It is not a party but one man organization like GP.

Beylerbeyi View Drop Down

Chieftain

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355

Quote

Posted: 26-Jun-2007 at 06:57

This happened just once in history during the election of �zal and nobody took it to Constitutional Court therefore he was elected.

Yes, there are other procedures which require a 2/3 majority, and it is possible to discuss them with 1/3 of the parliament (senseless according to you).

This is the way the parliament functioned until now. It was applied to Presidential elections as well as you wrote in case of Ozal. Only now when TSK didn't like the new president, they found this loophole in the law.

I no longer think are you are a Turkish nationalist in British disguise.

If you were, you wouldn't post such propaganda, you would knew that it would unmask you.

Don't waste your time on him. Discussing Turkey with a google-nationalist schoolboy is like playing basketball with a megalomanic dwarf. It's not worth the trouble.

Kapikulu

Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914

Quote

Posted: 26-Jun-2007 at 07:18

Originally posted by Mortaza

His time is finished but he is still president.

Owww..That's the provision of the constitution.If someone else do not get elected, the president continues to do his/her duty...

Originally posted by Mortaza

Not all AKP voters are today sympathizers of AKP, neither they were die-hard fans...Leaving that apart, it is natural that AKP does not like Sezer because he has rejected some of their legal and constitutional changes and did not approve the people AKP wanted, for certain posts. Furthermore their point of view do not fit to each other, so it is not because of Sezer himself, but his deeds not fitting AKP's will.

Originally posted by Mortaza

It is interesting he used that power as much as he can.

I should also add, Ozal did not reason any crises. Sezer reasoned a lot. His disrespect for parliment cannot acceptable.

You have said that before and I am still looking for examples how he really abused the power...It is within his capacity to reject the laws, but the parliament can re-accept them and send back to the president..His capacity at that time is just limited with taking them to the Constitutional Court

Ozal did not seem to reason any crisis, because he simply became a signing clerk for the government which was of his former party. But he wonderfully violated the rules within those decrees..

Originally posted by Mortaza

Well, I have told it with details why people's election of president is not a good idea.

I don't really know about how it is in every country..We need some other dualist executive system to compare(Most of the Western countries have a monarch as the head of state, some others have presidential or half-presidential system)..But for example in Greece, 2/3 vote is needed(200 out of 300)..

In the doctrine, this issue has been discussed a lot by constitutional law experts. And it is found very logical for some reasons.The final conclusion of the experts are that the president shall be elected with compromise rather than whomever has some majority selecting the president.

Originally posted by Mortaza

Political parties? Allahtan kork.(Be afraid from God)

Turkey was never a real democracy.Learn what is traditional Turkey.

Realy? Army forced Turkey another elections(with the help of NEUTRAL court) Army stoped election of president too.

So I am sure we can count this as a coup..

Ah, military was always in control of everything in the country ,right..I am bored of this simple approach only made based on 1980 coup...

Army this, army that...That's no different than playing "Conspiracy Theorician" game.

I am, as usual, talking about the ideal characteristics...Like secularism which AKP loves a lot

...

But however, as our dear lovely Prime Minister Erdogan says; " we will use democracy not as an aim but as a tool.

When we achieve democracy someday, this hyprocrisy of politicians and political groups will be over, likewise the people will have enough political conscience and army will be only doing its own duties. But we won't get anywhere with people who uses democracy as a tool, rather than trying to achieve it, so we have a long way to.

We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli

Kapikulu