It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Amid a push for increased executive powers, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan cited the political system under German dictator Adolf Hitler after being questioned whether a "unitary state" could exist with his ambitions of an executive-style presidential system.
"In a unitary system [such as Turkey's] a presidential system can work perfectly," Erdogan told reporters on Thursday after returning from a trip to Saudi Arabia, according to Turkish media.
"There are already examples in the world. You can see it when you look at Hitler's Germany," he added.
Erdogan has pushed for Turkey's 1980 Constitution - which was written after a military coup the same year - to be changed, in order to transform the president's office from a largely ceremonial role to that of a chief executive, similar to systems in the US, France and Russia.
The president's critics believe his ambitions could give far-reaching powers to a man who has displayed increasingly authoritarian attributes.
“Had Charles Martel not been victorious,” Hitler told his inner crowd in August 1942, “then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone.
Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world.” Hitler told Albert Speer that Islam is “perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament.”
If the Muslims had won in Tours, the whole of Europe would have become Muslim in the 8th century and “the conquering Arabs, because of their racial inferiority, would in the long run have been unable to contend with the harsher climate and conditions of [Europe].
They could not have kept down the more vigorous natives, so that ultimately not Arabs but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire.”
originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
It's all an embarrassment what with Turkey being a NATO member.
NATO stands for democracy, yet this man appears to be hell bent on becoming a Despot.
Oh dear.
This is a desire of almost all muslims , unite and be strong.
originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: DJW001
That's interesting.
Erdogan has claimed that he has been called Georgian, even Armenian in the past, although he claims to be Turkish.
Maybe he's actually German.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: 23432
This is a desire of almost all muslims , unite and be strong.
That seems to be true of people who identify themselves primarily as Muslims, as opposed to Americans who practice Islam, or British of Pakistani ancestry, etc. Islam's biggest problem now is deciding which form of Islam should all the Ummah practice, and which country should should be the seat of the Caliphate. The Turks believe that because the last ruler to style himself Caliph was Ottoman, they have that right. Saudi Arabia possesses Mecca, so naturally they believe they have the right. Iran believes that the Sunnis betrayed the Prophet by murdering his true heir... etc. In the meantime, members of minority sects rule over patches of ground as "Secularists," meaning that others are permitted to worship in their own way, provided that their own minority sect is dominant.
Erdogan is out to show to World that islam doesn't need to practice democracy exclusively to co-exist with Christianity .
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: 23432
Erdogan is out to show to World that islam doesn't need to practice democracy exclusively to co-exist with Christianity .
And that is my problem with Erdogan: the thought that 20% of the population of the entire world would forego their right to determine how they are governed and by whom, is disturbing.
"Charıty Stones in Ottoman Istanbul" One of the areas Ottoman culture excelled was security against poverty. What I am about to tell you may sound like a fairy tale today, yet it is the truth.
The Ottomans had stone pillars, approximately the size of a human, which can still be found in certain parts of Istanbul.
The purpose these stones served was not as mysterious as that of the monoliths at Stonehenge, but it may turn out to be more exciting by far in social terms.
They were called “Charity Stones” (sadaka taşı) .
A rich person who wanted to make a donation would reach up to a niche at the top of the stone, where he would deposit his gift.
Later on, a needy person would come along,reach up, take what was enough for his needs, and leave the rest of the money where it was so that another one in need may find solace.
The purpose of this device was to preserve the anonymity of the poor, thereby saving them from shame and loss of face. No one was reduced to begging.
Most people don't want the burden of " thinking " for themselves which is the global reality exists as it is , unfortunately.
I tell you what bothers me more ; the thought of muslims following the rule of law not based on their own history and culture but that of Rome .
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: 23432
Most people don't want the burden of " thinking " for themselves which is the global reality exists as it is , unfortunately.
Unfortunately, you seem to be right about that.
I tell you what bothers me more ; the thought of muslims following the rule of law not based on their own history and culture but that of Rome .
But modern Western law owes less to Rome over time. We still have civil contracts based on Roman law, but we no longer treat human beings as property. Most laws come from the concepts of the Enlightenment, when reason trumped revelation. I for one prefer a reasoned body of laws developed over time through debate over a fossilized body of law supposedly handed down by a god.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: 23432
Ottoman System of Government doesn't equal to Sharia for non muslims , I think that is the main point worth making .
True, but what if I don't want to pay the tax?