Tuesday, 21 February 2017

President Trump

21.02.2017
I backed Trump to win the US Presidential election at 5-1. Everyday seems to be a Trump news day, so I decided to start a blog to chronicle the on-going drama.

I thought the Inaugural Address was superb. Others deemed it horrendous. This is it..
https://www.whitehouse.gov/inaugural-address

Sabotage: Obama Is Commanding An Army Of 30,000 Anti-Trump Activists From His Home 2 Miles From The White House
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/sabotage-obama-is-commanding-an-army-of-30000-anti-trump-activists-from-his-home-2-miles-from-the-white-house
DONALD TRUMP HAS UTTERLY DEFEATED THE DISLOYAL COTERIES OF THE US INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY
http://www.thetreeofliberty.com/vb/showthread.php?232289-Leakers-Beware-By-Thomas-Wictor&s=830034950de99e58651bbb972ac5ca41
Why Trump is Right About Sweden
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmbmP6zssWo
Marine Le Pen Refuses To Wear Headscarf In Lebanon
http://tapnewswire.com/2017/02/marine-le-pen-refuses-to-wear-headscarf-in-lebanon/

After Brexit and Trump, I bck Marine Le Pen to win in France...
Marine Le Pen Refuses To Wear Headscarf In Lebanon:
http://tapnewswire.com/2017/02/marine-le-pen-refuses-to-wear-headscarf-in-lebanon/

25.04.2017 - Trump calls 1915 killings of Armenians 'Meds Yeghern':
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/trump-calls-1915-killings-of-armenians-meds-yeghern.aspx?PageID=238&NID=112395&NewsCatID=358
.... U.S. President Donald Trump called the 1915 killings of Armenians “Meds Yeghern,” an Armenian term meaning “great calamity,” avoiding the use of the word “genocide.”

Trump is avoiding the word 'genocide'.

“In international relations it must be the ardent wish of the whole civilised world to put an end to the time when the system of puppets governs policy.”
Atatürk Nutuk Great Speech 15-20 Oct 1927 Eng version p.573

From Ataturk’s Nutuk 36 hour speech given 15-20 October 1927, there are passages relevant to the alleged Armenian ‘genocide’.

I write out the words as per the book and the given English translation. Of course, being these are the words of Atatürk, they risk the accusation of bias. My ‘feeling’ is Atatürk’s account is worthy of consideration. We were not there and can only examine the apparent evidence.

Atatürk represented a National Assembly based out of Ankara. The established ‘Government’ represented the remnants of the Caliphate and Sultanate powers based in Istanbul. The ‘Government’ were considering compromise and appeasement with foreign forces while the National Assembly sought complete national independence.

p.318
“Gentleman! A communication from Istanbul on 19 February 1920 brought us the news that:
“The English diplomatic representative has verbally given definite information to the Government from the Foreign Office that the capital will be left to the Ottoman Empire, but at the same time, he has demanded that the Armenian massacres shall cease forthwith and that our operations against the Allied troops – including those of Greece – shall also cease immediately. He added if this were not done, our peace conditions would be altered…

p.319
Finally, did the Allied Powers entertain some doubt about the Government not succeeding in disbanding troops at the front which the national forces had sent into the occupied districts to oppose the forces of the enemy and put an end to the fight they carried on and the movement they made against them, and did they consequently plan to occupy Istanbul on the pretext that the Government could neither prevent the attacks against the Allied Powers (including the Greeks) nor put an end to the Armenian massacres – which, by the way, did not exist?

I believe that later events have shown that the last of these suggestions was the nearest of all to the truth. It was, however, noticeable that the Government, far from interpreting the proposal made by the English diplomatic representative in this light, had, on the contrary, founded their hopes on it.

Gentleman! In order to understand how ill-advised this proposal was, we shall recall certain phases of the situation as they presented themselves at the time. The assertions regarding the Armenians massacres were undoubtedly not in accordance with fact. For the Armenians in the south, armed by foreign troops and encouraged by the protection they enjoyed, attacked the Muslims of their district.

p.320
Animated by the spirit of revenge, they pursued a relentless policy of murder and extermination everywhere. This was responsible for the tragic incident at Maras (Ned note: sounds like Marash). Making common cause with the foreign troops, the Armenians had completely destroyed an old Muslim town like Maras by their artillery and machine-gun fire.

They killed thousands of innocent and defenceless women and children. The Armenians were the instigators of the atrocities, which were unique in history. The Muslims had merely offered resistance and had defended themselves with the object of saving their lives and their honour. The telegram which the Americans, who had remained in the town with the Muslims during the five days that the massacres continued, had sent to their representatives in Istanbul, clearly indicates in an indisputable manner who were the originators of this tragedy.

Threatened by the bayonets of the Armenians, who were armed to the teeth, the Muslims in the Vilayet of Adana were at that time in danger of being annihilated. While this policy of oppression and annihilation carried on against the Muslims, who were only trying to save their lives and their independence, was liable to attract the attention of the civilised world and excite their commiseration, how could the denials or the proposal made to us to abandon the attitude attributed to us be taken seriously?”

The truth? It’s apparently both allusive and right in front of your face, if you wish to see it. It seems the status quo is crumbling just as the Ottoman Empire did. As we know, Christopher Columbus discovered America – didn’t he? Any comment Piri Reis?!