Jump to content
Phantis Forums

Go:bekli

Members
  • Content Count

    878
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

64 Neutral

About Go:bekli

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,388 profile views
  1. As far as I can tell (through observation of Greek text that apparently rose to heaven), the new software ignores and suppresses text written in the Greek language. I forwarded this information(?) to our friend (gülen gülen) Recep who responded as follows: 1) Lazarus has earned the very best medals of the Turkish Republic. 2) As many of the “Greek” last names show, the best Greek subjects are, as I as well, the descendants of Christian Ottoman citizens and they will be better off if they start using the glorious Ottoman Turkish rather than the bizarre linguistic potpourri spoken by the Hellenized Albanians, Slavs, and Vlachs/Aromanians. ) 3)The introduction of new interfaces that will support more or less the same functionality as the old ones is a coup de genie that will separate the chaff from the wheat (Buğday samandan ayrılacak!); ditto for the suppressing dumb posts expressed in a dying idiom! I assume that the new software, somewhat like the yalancı dolmalar, will make us stronger.
  2. Go:bekli

    It has become obvious that he refers to Savvas. But Georgatos has become the very image of pettiness. If you must accuse someone, you must name him and list what he did. These vague accusations towards someone who is not named are a boomerang.
  3. In order to make sure as to what the whole issue is (or I think it is), I will quote excerpts from the Wikipedia. My own text/comments will be in red. COINTELPRO encompassed disruption and sabotage of the Socialist Workers Party (1961), the Ku Klux Klan (1964), the Nation of Islam, the Black Panther Party (1967), and the entire New Left social/political movement, which included antiwar, community, and religious groups (1968). A later investigation by the Senate's Church Committee (see below) stated that "COINTELPRO began in 1956, in part because of frustration with Supreme Court rulings limiting the Government's power to proceed overtly against dissident groups ..."[31] Official congressional committees and several court cases[32] have concluded that COINTELPRO operations against communist and socialist groups exceeded statutory limits on FBI activity and violated constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and association.[1] The program was successfully kept secret until 1971, when the Citizens' Commission to Investigate the FBI burgled an FBI field office in Media, Pennsylvania, took several dossiers, and exposed the program by passing this material to news agencies.[33] Many news organizations initially refused to publish the information. Within the year, Director J. Edgar Hoover declared that the centralized COINTELPRO was over, and that all future counterintelligence operations would be handled on a case-by-case basis.[34][35] Additional documents were revealed in the course of separate lawsuits filed against the FBI by NBC correspondent Carl Stern, the Socialist Workers Party, and a number of other groups. In 1976 the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities of the United States Senate, commonly referred to as the "Church Committee" for its chairman, Senator Frank Church of Idaho, launched a major investigation of the FBI and COINTELPRO. Journalists and historians speculate that the government has not released many dossier and documents related to the program. Many released documents have been partly, or entirely, redacted. The Final Report of the Select Committee castigated conduct of the intelligence community in its domestic operations (including COINTELPRO) in no uncertain terms: The Committee finds that the domestic activities of the intelligence community at times violated specific statutory prohibitions and infringed the constitutional rights of American citizens. The legal questions involved in intelligence programs were often not considered. On other occasions, they were intentionally disregarded in the belief that because the programs served the "national security" the law did not apply. While intelligence officers on occasion failed to disclose to their superiors programs which were illegal or of questionable legality, the Committee finds that the most serious breaches of duty were those of senior officials, who were responsible for controlling intelligence activities and generally failed to assure compliance with the law.[1] Many of the techniques used would be intolerable in a democratic society even if all of the targets had been involved in violent activity, but COINTELPRO went far beyond that ... the Bureau conducted a sophisticated vigilante operation aimed squarely at preventing the exercise ofFirst Amendment rights of speech and association, on the theory that preventing the growth of dangerous groups and the propagation of dangerous ideas would protect the national security and deter violence. ???? And now we come to the Chomskian suggestion that the removal of Nixon from office served to keep the worse aspects of COINTELPRO secret ?.. In a 1996 'Big Idea' interview with BBC journalist Andrew Marr, Noam Chomsky suggests that the revelation of COINTELPRO was actually vastly more significant than Watergate,[36] exposure of which happened at exactly the same time. While Chomsky doesn't allege a conspiracy per se, he seems to imply that the apparently convenient timing might suggest that President Nixon could have been sacrificed to drown out media interest in COINTELPRO[37] or that at the very least, the fact that the full extent of the COINTELPRO programme remains relatively unknown is proof that the press has done a poor job in investigating the FBI's activities even once they have been admitted. It was later revealed that the secret Deep Throat source who tipped off Washington Post journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein to the Watergate break-in source was FBI Associate Director Mark Felt for reasons which, according to Chomsky, have never been conclusively explained ?.. My overall understanding is that the COINTELPRO program was a criminal enterprise by people who should have been sent to gaol.
  4. At least one of you has contracted, methinks, advanced Trumpism (or possibly Clintonism). The job of the police is to enforce only the existing laws, all of the existing laws and to not choose which ones to ignore or break in the pursuit of a greater good.
  5. In case one cares, here is a list of those who like and those who dislike EU. As usual, among those who are negative, we are the champions. while Poland is at the other end.
  6. Mme Lagarde gave an interview to the Financia6 Times. According to NEA Mme Lagarde also said the following:
  7. Michel Rocard died on July 2. At http://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-politics-rocard-idUSKCN0ZI0VP one can read who he thought concerning the British and the Brexit
  8. An interesting (in my opinion) article can be read at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-27/get-ready-to-see-this-globalization-elephant-chart-over-and-over-again . An excerpt follows:
  9. There is an interesting phenomenon that unfolds in England and in the US as well. The unwashed do not care for the preferences of the upper class Brahmins and vote in patterns that the upper class does not approve or understand. The answer of the upper class that knows everything and apparently understands nothing is to lecture the Luddites and to add fuel to the fire. Let us look at the recent referendum in England. We are told that 1) The majority was misinformed, dumb, and egotistical while 2) The proponents of the exit lied and misinformed the people. while the learned analyses concerning the referendum do not address, as a rule, the following: Why did the upper class that has both money and education fail to persuade the voters that the proponents of the exit were misrepresenting the facts and that the exit would be ruinous?
  10. As far as I know, 1) Today?s Europe still is the outcome of Ethnic antagonisms. To argue that England should become a (de facto) province of the United Europe because within the union the English would have superior buying power is not (and was not) a winning argument. 2) To argue the young against the old is also a bizarre argument. In a democracy the citizens who can vote are considered to be equal. 3) A look at the rich in the Ottoman Empire would show that the Christians and the Jews were money-wise better off than the Muslims. Certainly, they were better off before Mustapha Kemal pasha sent them to the other side of the Aegean. Why on hell would they act in a way incompatible with their financial interests? No matter where, a good percentage of the low class citizens has come to the conclusion (correct or not) that the rich and the educated are persons of diluted patriotism who have more in common with their equals across the borders and less with their compatriots. If so, they who cotton to the EU are perceived as foreign to the nation, to its past, to its present, and to its future. Just look, if you wish, at the Tea party and the Trump voters who at first glance appear to vote against their own interests.
  11. Go:bekli

    That sums up Savvidis .......... Did you mean Theodoridis?
×
×
  • Create New...