<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

November 12 2008 at 11:51 AM
No score for this post

Anonymous  (Login amerinako)

 
Is Turkey Bosnias mother?
by
HAJRUDIN SOMUN

Is Turkey Bosnias mother? This is a question that is easy to reply to. No, it is not because Turkey does not need to be a mother to anyone other than to its citizens.
The issue, however, is more complicated when we come to the current situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, a country that faces problems which bring into question its integrity and sovereignty.Ardent polemics are being tossed around by Sarajevos media and at various conferences on the identity of Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats -- the three main nationalities, or ethnic groups, that make up Bosnia and Herzegovina. There were at least two starting points that brought Bosniaks -- the official name for Bosnian Muslims -- into the focus of the polemics and which made a direct connection to Turks and Turkey.One was initiated by the highest religious authority and the other by events that are increasingly making soccer games in some Balkan countries a tool for expressing social frustrations and nationalist hatred. From the sublime to the ridiculous and destructive, we could say.

First, Dr. Mustafa Efendi Ceric, the reis-ul-ulema (grand mufti) of Bosnia and Herzegovina, made some statements over the last few years about the correlation between Bosniaks and Turks, statements open to discussion, no doubt. Speaking to participants, Bosniaks and Turks, at a reconstructed mosque in Rogatica on Sept. 2, 2006, he said: I propose we all call ourselves Turks. And we are Turks -- by our historical memory, by our historical disposition, by the identity of Islam that Turks brought to us. However, we are also Bosniaks. The grand mufti of Bosnia also told Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoðan during his visit to Sarajevo on March 25, 2008, Please convey to your people the following: Turkey is our mother; it has been so and it will remain so.

Discussion spills into streets

The discussion easily made its way to the streets. Hundreds of fans waved and kissed Turkish flags, shouting This is Turkey! in Sarajevo, Zenica and the part of Mostar with a Bosniak majority after Turkey defeated Croatia in the European Football Championship on June 20, 2008. It was partially a reaction to the disappointed fans among the Bosnian Croats, who were, especially in Mostar, shouting Kill, kill the Turk! It was not clear whether they meant the real Turks or Bosniaks, who have for long been called Turks by Serbs and Croats, particularly in recent wars. In some places, tekbirs were used as refrains, but This is Turkey was more loudly heard than Allahu Ekber, the usual reply to the word tekbir.

The heated atmosphere on the streets consequently transferred to a heated debate among intellectuals about the identity of Bosniaks. The Dani weekly hosted leading Bosnian intellectuals and invented a new term, turcenje, pronounced turchenye. It can roughly be translated to becoming a Turk or to make ones self a Turk. State TV organized a similar debate a month ago, just two days before the soccer match between Bosnia and Turkey in Ýstanbul.

The statements of Reis-ul-Ulema Ceric about Turkey as Bosnias mother as well as his frequent mention of Mehmet the Conqueror as a kind of Bosnian father are being used as a pretext for any argument on the Bosniak identity.

The approach of the Bosnian grand mufti was rather isolated. Bosniak politicians were silent. They, in any case, do not at all have a strategy to preserve the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as recently stressed by journalist Vildana Selimbegovic. Intellectuals, refusing to identify Bosniaks with Turks, have been quick to steer the discussion into one of how nationalism is the common enemy of all Bosnian ethnic communities. Leading theologians from the Faculty of Islamic Sciences did not this time openly show their traditional opposition to Dr. Ceric as the religious leader. However, the opinion of the reis-ul-ulema -- a position that is more than equivalent to the head of Turkeys Directorate of Religious Affairs -- is considered a religious orientation for all believers, even if it is not obligatory, unlike a fetva. And if it was made public outside the mosque, it gets even more social and political weight as well.

A simplified attitude easily adopted by young boys (almost never girls) who are mostly less educated, often jobless and frustrated and rarely enter any mosques is that Bosniaks, as Bosnian Muslims, have no reserve homeland as Bosnian Serbs have Serbia and Bosnian Croats Croatia. Going further and joining religion in such a simplification, they say: If Serbia is considered as an extended hand of Orthodox Christianity and Croatia of Catholicism, why should we not ask Turkey to be our mother country? Bosnian philosopher Ugo Vlaisavljevic expressed it in these words: This is a good opportunity; we should finally face the real nature of local ethnic identities. Ethnologists have known this for a long time: These are decentralized identities because the centers of their symbolic fuel are not here, but in Ýstanbul, Moscow, Vienna and Rome.

A few other reactions to the grand muftis identification of Bosniaks and Turks and the pro-Turkey euphoria of sport fans are possible indirect results of that identification. Tarik Haveric, an author and translator, speaking about two ethno-genetic processes in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the last 100 years, stresses that efforts by (Bosnian) Muslims to eliminate a notional and terminological equalization of themselves with Turks and to rid themselves of their name [Muslims] have been more or less realized today. For another political analyst, Sacir Filandra, Bosniaks have no one and nothing positive to applaud and to identify themselves with because the symbolic Bosniak horizon of the collective auto-perception is filled with pain and sadness, loss and genocide, marking out mass killings and concentration camps as well by the opening of mosques, in one word -- by the ulterior and metaphysic. For him, the symbolic identification with Turkish sport fans has origins in such a negative life view.

Pecanin: Ceric causing confusion

A leading Bosnian journalist, Senad Pecanin, was more concrete in considering reasons for the grand muftis redefinition of the Bosniak national identity and then reducing it to the religious component.

Ceric is not a Turkish nationalist, and he does not do it out of pro-Turkish feelings, he emphasizes, but because he has an unhidden ambition to become the leader of all European Muslims and to negotiate with Europeans about their status. Showing to his students that Turkey is their mother and not Bosnia and Herzegovina, Pecanin concludes, he is bringing confusion among Bosniaks and hatred, derisive smiles and disdain from their neighbors.

It is not easy for me personally to speak about this matter because I have many friends who are scholars in Turkey who could refer to the developments in the Balkans and tell me, Well, while serving in Turkey as the ambassador to Bosnia and Herzegovina, you said Bosnians are Turkeys orphans. This is true, I did use the Turkish word yetim to describe Bosnians. There was a need in the midst of aggression against Bosnia to encourage aid to its besieged and exhausted citizens. I also used this word to refer to our common history, but I never identified Bosnians with Turks, and there are many reasons for this.

First and foremost, I represented all of Bosnia and Herzegovina and sought support for Bosniaks and a considerable number of Serbs and Croats, who also suffered from the aggression of Slobodan Milosevics Serbian forces and Radovan Karadzics Bosnian Serb forces.

Additionally, there are some obvious reasons for not equating Bosniaks and Turks, this despite all the deep historical links and steady friendship.

The Bosnia and Herzegovina of today is very different from the Bosnia that was a part of the Ottoman Empire. Both Turkey and Bosnia differ greatly today from how they were under Mehmet the Conqueror, who brought to Bosnia the Ahdname, a document guaranteeing freedom of activity to Bosnian Franciscan Catholics.

The two countries were also different at the end of the 19th century, when Bosnia was taken over by Austro-Hungary and Turkey was transformed into a republic, shedding its Ottoman past. Bosnian Muslims, as part of the multiethnic and multi-religious Bosnian community and have developed their own national identity, recognized by Turkey as well as by the international community. It is perhaps not worthy of mention that no one in Turkey today considers Bosnia as a part of the broader Turkic world, although there were efforts in that regard by some pan-Turkic organizations during the war. If nothing else, the Bosnian language is Slavic, despite having thousands of loanwords of Turkish origin.

I was additionally encouraged to tackle this sensitive issue by Turkish President Abdullah Güls recent statement. He confirmed once more during a meeting with the chairman of the Bosnian Presidency, Haris Silajdzic, that Turkey is maintaining efforts to protect Bosnia and Herzegovinas sovereignty, political unity and territorial integrity. He also indicated that he is well aware of the current situation in Bosnia, including the discussion on identity. We support the multicultural structure of Bosnia and Herzegovina and are therefore keeping an equal distance with respect to all ethnic groups, he said.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

Anonymous
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 12 2008, 11:52 AM 

What do you know...at least some DUMB bosniaks are waking up to the true reality of who they are!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Anonymous
(Login Dane_B)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 13 2008, 10:47 AM 

I agree amerinako, only a stupid cu.t can post a comment like this anonymus!
Transvestite and someone who was badly molested in childhood!

P.S. change nick into kretano you stupid fool

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

Anonymous
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 13 2008, 10:28 PM 

turcin you are always talking about molestation, I know you love the gay turkish baths, it's in your'e blood. Is this where you were molested? You WORTHLESS piece of wanna-be islamic SH*T!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

Anonymous
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 13 2008, 10:30 PM 

turcin change your screename to Sasa or Zlate or Vladomir. Comeback to where you belong you brainwashed uneducated worthless piece of muslim sh*t!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

Anonymous
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 13 2008, 10:30 PM 

turcin change your screename to Sasa or Zlate or Vladomir. Comeback to where you belong you brainwashed uneducated worthless piece of muslim sh*t!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Anonymous
(Login Dane_B)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 14 2008, 8:32 AM 

Ugly bitch. When you had sex change surgery were you made into woman, or woman into man?
Were you an retarded whore or retarded cu.t?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

Anonymous
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 14 2008, 11:46 AM 

dane i'm gonna f*ck your mother with a PORK sausage you dirty wanna-be muslim! Now go help your father shave your sisters picka!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Anonymous
(Login Dane_B)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 5:29 AM 

Who is wanna-be you retard stepson of Pavle. I don't go to other forums saying how good my nationality is. If my ancestors were from Afgan maybe I would, you wanna-be Afgan cu.t. You are christian? You fu.ked up christian religions in Balkans when your filthy Afgan ancestors took christianity here. You know deep down who you are bitch.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

amerinako
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 10:59 AM 

pedar dosta, wake up and realize who and what you are not the fables you have been reading. If anyone comes from Afghanistan it is you moron. You practice the same beliefs I dont, nor would I ever. Your ancestors took it in the ass from the Turks, my family fought the Turks(name can be traced back to the early 1300's dane, how far back can you trace your modern family???)! Big difference between you and me, your family was affraid to fight and my family fought, and this is why the rest of Europe isn't muslim. All because of the Serbs.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Anonymous
(Login Dane_B)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 11:44 AM 

Wanna-be transvestite.
The biggest and the longest uprisal against the Turks was Husen Gradascevic fight.
And he did not slaughter his own village like Milos did to raise people against turks.
In Kosovo it was Serbs who were slaughtered the most but Bosnians were there also. You kidnaped the mith on Kosovo because you like to drink and halucinate with Pavle about some heroics.
About the religion, any religion you and Pavle are in, I go for other. That's why my ancestors took islam, Bosnian islam, and I am very grateful for that. If they did not do it retard, I would have done it now.
You are long gone and forgoten with your wanna-be talk turks and bull. Past time bitch.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

amerinako
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 12:52 PM 

[linked image]

WHICH ONE IS HOTTER???
[linked image]

[linked image]

[linked image]

[linked image]


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

amerinako
(Login amerinako)

you FILTHY DIRTY wanna-be muslim

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 1:00 PM 

Bosnian islam. never heard of that, how far back does that go? 1990-1991 loser

Is this your family flag you DIRTY muslim

[linked image]

your father

[linked image]

your mother

[linked image]

Finally a gift for your WHORE sister, the little one

[linked image]

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

amerinako
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 1:14 PM 

Bosnia-Herzegovina came under Ottoman rule in 1492, the year Muslims lost Spain. The Bogomils, seeing the merciful and tolerant nature of these conquerors declared en masse their allegiance to the Ottoman Empire and their acceptance of Islam.

Seeing the success of Croatian Nazis in turning the clock back to 1941, Islam fundamentalist Muslims of Bosnia are trying to turn the clock even further back into the Balkan past. They are trying to turn the clock more than 100 years back. Back to the time when Bosnia was part of Turkish Empire.... And non-Muslims were only second class citizens. In doing that they have full support from the "democratic West".

Who are Bosnians, Bosniaks?
Today's Muslims of Bosnia want to usurp the name - "Bosnian". Actually the Serbs and Croats are also indigenous people of Bosnia. They are also "Bosnians". How was the term invented?
And why are the Muslims of Bosnia (the Serbs and Croats who converted to Islam) offended to be called "Turks"? Only recently it was their prefered name.

Muslims oppressed Christians in Bosnia
Not only were Bosnian Muslims quislings of the hated oppressor who ruled Bosnia through tyranny, they outdid the Turks in oppressing remaining Christians of Bosnia. Learn about "The tax in blood" the Turks levied on their Christian subjects.

If any single factor made the Balkans what they were in history -- and what they still are today -- it was the ordeal of the Turk... For the 18th and 19th Centuries, the image of Turkey was that of a rotting empire, of a corrupt, incompetent and sadistic national elite preying on the subject Balkan peoples - of a cynical government whose very method of rule was atrocity.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

amerinako
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 1:18 PM 

"THE EMPEROR CONSTANTINE VII PORPHYROGENITUS (reigned 913-957) REFFERED TO BOSNIA AS PART OF THE LAND OF THE SERBS."

How far back did you say ASS CLOWN!



"SERBIAN SETLEMENT IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA BEGAN IN THE SEVENTH CENTURY A.D."

"THE LARGEST SINGLE NATIONAL ELEMENT [IN BOSNIA] IS THE ORTHODOX SERBS"

"In RECORD TIME, during the spring of 1943,... TWENTY THOUSAND BOSNIAN MUSLIM MEN VOLUNTEER... INTO WAFFEN-SS...

THEY PARTICIPATED IN THE MASSACRE OF CIVILIANS IN BOSNIA and VOLUNTEERED TO JOIN IN THE HUNT FOR JEWS IN CROATIA..."

"...IN BOSNIA...THE CROATIAN [AND MUSLIM] FASCISTS BEGAN A MASSACRE OF SERBS WHICH, IN THE WHOLE ANNALS OF WORLD WAR II, WAS SURPASSED FOR SAVAGERY ONLY BY THE MASS EXTERMINATION OF POLISH JEWS."

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

amerinako
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 1:18 PM 

by Professor Nikolaos A. Stavrou
There is a proliferation of well payed propagandists who sell themselves as ad hock Balkan "experts". Here is what a real expert, with a quarter of century of experience in the field, had to say...
(Dr Nikolaos A. Stavrou is professor of International Affairs
at Howard University. Among his publications
are Edvard Kardelj and the Historical Roots of Non-Alignment.
Mr. Kardelj was Croatian Dictator Tito's right hand man.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Bosnian mess is getting worse by the day. Yet, the American people are kept in the dark by a misinformation cabal and a MASTERFUL CENSORSHIP OF TRUTH that would have made many dictators envious. Instead of enlightenment, a new science of victimology has been developed to hide facts and force upon us a policy based on emotions.

Everywhere I traveled and every conference I attended in the past four years, one question always pops up: Where is the other side to the Bosnia story? I have no answer. But out of civic duty and being a professor who taught (and wrote extensively) Balkan affairs for a quarter of a century I hereby offer Bosnia 101. The course has no prerequisites.

Bosnia: It was an administrative unit (republic) of the Former Yugoslav Federation. On April 6 1992 it declared independence in violation of Helsinki accords, the CSCE process and its own constitution.

There was never a Bosnian state nor a Bosnian nation. Over 80% its inhabitants are Serbs in origin, 44 percent of which converted to Islam in the 16th century. The rest are Croats but they all speak the same language and share the same culture.

Why do they hate each other is traceable to World War II. Here is what happened in Yugoslavia during that time: the Croats established a Nazi puppet state, declared war on the western allies and SLAUGHTERED approximately 860,000 SERBS, Jews and Gypsies. Upon [the recent] independence, the first thing they did was to destroy the Jasenovac memorial to their victims; it was too visible a reminder to their atrocities. The Bosnians responded to a higher call: The Mufti of Jerusalem had promised to Hitler and delivered two Islamic Divisions to help assure Fuhrer's victory, who in turn would help the Mufti cleanse Jerusalem of all Jews. The most notorious of the two Muslim outfits was the SS Hanjar (Cleaver) maned by the direct ancestors of some of today's Bosnian leaders. Not to be outdone, the Albanian Muslims of Kosovo, too, fielded the SS Skenderbeg, which slaughtered thousands of Serbs and expelled even more from their homes. The Slovenes had it much easier: they were declared members of the "Aryan race," were drafted into the Nazi army, fought and died in Nazi uniforms in Montecassino and Stalingrad. Finally the Serbs and Montenegrins fought on the side of the allies and the cause of democracy only to be told today that they are the Fascists. With such a caricature of history, no wonder they are telling the rest of the world to go to hell. Finally, in 1963 Tito, a Communist, and by definition an atheist, invoked religion (Islam) and declared existence of a new nation in Yugoslavia: the Muslims.

Helsinki Accords: The Islamic leaders of Bosnia violated these accords, the CSCE process and the constitution of Bosnia Hercegovina when they declared independence in 1992. The center piece of Helsinki accords was the finalization and acceptance of post-world war II European borders as inviolable. Changes of borders could come only by peaceful means and after negotiations and agreement among parties affected. Peaceful change of borders (even when caused by declaration of independence as was the case of Bosnia) meant, above all else, adherence to the constitutional provisions of parties affected. The Bosnian constitution in effect when Muslims declared independence (with the tacit support of Croats) required a consensus of the three ethnic groups, Croats , Muslims and Serbs (not a technical majority) prior to secession from the Yugoslav Federation. The plurality group, i.e. the Muslims, violated this provision. The Serbs opted for the mountains.

Alija Izetbegovic: President of Bosnia, father of the Bosnian mess and author of the Islamic Declaration: A program for the Islamization of the Muslims and the Muslim Peoples (Sarajevo, 1990). In this treatise Izetbegovic offers his "vision" for Bosnia and the Muslim world. Here I will selectively quote few passages from the 1990 edition (which he never renounced) on issues that the western press choose to ignore, perhaps fearing that the American people might understand why the Serbs fight on.

"The Islamic declaration," Izetbegovic assured us, "can and should take over power as soon as it is morally and numerically strong enough to be able to overturn not only the existing non-Islamic government [of Bosnia] but also to build a new Islamic one." (p. 56). For the Serbs this meant that when Muslims reach 51% percent of the population in Bosnia in short six years, given their birth rate and other means. The Islamic order which would follow this overturn is defined as " a unity of religion and law, upbringing and power, ideal and interest." (p. 26). In this new order citizenship, too, is given an Islamic bend. "In the Muslim world," Izetbegovic admonishes, "there is no patriotism without Islam." (p. 64) In short, in this ideal state, the only way left for the Serbs to be considered full citizens and "patriots" would have been conversion to Islam. That is what their ancestors did in 16th century to please the Sultan and earn the right to own Orthodox Christian serfs and append the suffix "-bey" to their last names. Finally, in Izetbegovic's "Islamic order" separation of doctrine and faith from politics has no place. "There can be neither peace nor co-existance between the Islamic religion and the non-Islamic social and political institutions." (p. 30)

Lisbon Agreement on Bosnia: On March 18, 1992, or twenty three days prior to any shot being fired or a life lost in Bosnia, the European Community, following Helsinki and CSCE principles, summoned the leaders of the three Bosnian ethnic groups to Lisbon. They were persuaded to reach a consensus prior to the declaration of independence, as required by their Constitution. The leaders of these groups SIGNED an agreement, MAPS AND ALL, which became known as the Lisbon Agreement. Concessions were made on all sides. The Serbs agreed to a 44% of the territory (for local administrative purposes only) and the new state would have only one international personality. The Europeans envisioned a loose confederate system with borders to be recognized by all, including rump Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). A strong central government, proportionally representing all groups, and a rotating presidency were part of the accords, as was the case up to that point. The Lisbon Agreement was torpedoed ten days later by the then U.S. ambassador to Belgrade, Warren Zimmermann, who lately expounds a wimpy mea culpa. Zimmermann appeared in Sarajevo on March 28, 1992 as Izetbegovic's Deus ex Machina. The American diplomat thought the solution achieved in Lisbon to the thorny Bosnian problem would set a bad precedent for the former Soviet Union that was also collapsing along ethnic lines.

Izetbegovic, who always dreamed of a unitary Islamic state, was encouraged by our Ambassador to withdraw his signature. Thirteen days later, full scale civil war commenced. Who started it? Izetbegovic's boys. Among their other "achievements", they can also claim the slaughtered 92 cadets of "Marshal Tito Military Academy," Yugoslavia's equivalent to Westpoint. A solemn promise by Izetbegovic "of free passage" meant nothing. These boys, ages 17-21, who had yet to fire rifle, were cut to peaces while sitting in their buses. General Ratko Mladic promised never to forget that atrocity.

Haris Silajdzic: Prime Minister of Bosnia. Educated in Bengazi Libya and received some training in PLO tactics in Beirut and Bekka valley. He maintains extensive business interests in Libya where in the 1980s he was receiving preferential treatment in construction contracts. Among the "business" projects that Silajdzic was in involved in Tripoli was Quaddafi's Chemical Weapons factory, for which [West] Germans provided the scientific know how. The Bosnian Prime Minister is one of few Washington-decrees "Democrats" on a first name relationship with Muamar [Quaddafi].

Safe Havens: Enclaves which were supposed to protect civilians from the war's harm. Under U.N. auspices, they have been converted into staging grounds by Muslims who, like their counterparts in Lebanon, use civilians as shields to commence operations against the Serbs. When the later respond, CNN is conveniently there to record the event and the U.S. Air Force (with a NATO hat ) could be occasionally employed to even the scores. Since 1993 all so-called safe havens have been converted into arms production centers. Bihac, for example, was prior to the war a major conventional arms and munitions production center. Under the "safe-haven designation," it was restored to full capacity with the help of Turkey and the Iranian Ayatollahs. Gorazde, a city often in the news but never explained why, has a large and efficient munitions plant. Loads of raw materials labeled "fertilizers" are routinely allowed into the city while the U.N. "peacekeepers" look the other way. As far as I can tell, Gorazde is the only city with agricultural production.

Ethnic Cleansing and Refugees: A policy of removing people from their homes by force. The term was coined by former Yugoslav president and historian, Dobrica Cosic, in reference to the forced expulsion of Serbs from Kosovo by Albanians. The Albanians had succeeded in reducing the Serb population of the province from 37% in 1965 to approximately 10% in 1981. That is the year Slobodan Milosevic was born politically, by promising to the Kosovo Serbs "no body will beat you again." The term "ethnic cleansing" is now ascribed exclusively to Serbs. Yet, 37% of all refugees in former Yugoslavia are Serbs, or a total of 575,000. One wonders where they came from and where their homes are. Moreover, 120,000 Bosnian Muslims have sought refuge in Serbia-Montenegro, the land of their "enemy". These facts, too, are ignored by the press and the Washington officialdom. Their revelation would probably undermine the simplistic notion "one victim, one enemy."

American Foreign Policy: Since the Gulf War, American foreign policy has been privatized and tribalized. Smart public relations operatives ( most of them recycled policy-makers) laugh all the way to the bank with foreign or domestic ethnic money, pumped into their accounts. The payback is "policy influence." The "lap-top bombardiers" have no fear of their kids being killed in a foreign war. They saw to it, long ago, that there will be no military draft. Their tender offspring are safe in the Ivy League sanctuaries preparing for the inevitable "hardships" of Madison Avenue, Wall Street, think thanks or K street. Other peoples sons and daughters, poor ghetto boys and girls, will do the fighting. it is their job, we are told; ours is a professional military.

Bill Clinton told us "Bosnia is not about Bosnia"; and Robert D. Kaplan told us why. The "Balkan region," Kaplan wrote, "except for the cold war era - is the Middle East." Leverage with Arabs, he argued "is slipping due to the ... administration's failure in Bosnia." In this topsy turvy world where peace in the Middle East and access to Arab pockets are facilitated by war in the Balkans, truth is the victim. PR people and image-makers, with accounts to be concerned about, positioned themselves as the dominant sources of information on Bosnia. Revisions will come later, when they will be searching the globe for new victims to defend on a fee for services basis.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

amerinako
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 1:25 PM 


WHat is this flag dane?
[linked image]

Ban Matej Ninoslav


The text which speaks that Bosnia, according to the following Bosnian ruler, is inhabited only by Serbs and Vlachs

This is an without a doubt proof that within medieval Bosnia Serbs were the main inhabitants even while Bosnia stretched from Sarajevo to Zenica only (the valley of the river "Bosna"). In the international accord on the lack on Bosnian-Dubrovnik relations, the Ban (viceroy) Ninoslav explicitly calls his subjects "Serbs" (Srblji) and the Dubrovnikers "Vlachs" (Vlasi).
For deceit by a Vlach of a Serb, a Bosnian court was to be conveyed. But for deceit of a Serb over a Vlach, a court was to be convened in Dubrovnik.
Calling Dubrovnikers "Vlachs" as well as the Latin origin of their prince's name, tells us that, at the time, the Dubrovnikers were still ROMANS and not Slavicized, whereas the Bosnians where "Serbs" who felt the difference enough to use two different names to describe themselves.
This was all written when Bosnia was only 100 km from the Dubrovnik border, and the agreement does not does not apply to Serb tribes within Dubrovnik. Serbia, at the time was under the rule of the Nemanjic Kings and at the time, they also bordered Dubrovnik.

1232-1235

In the name of the father, son and the holy ghost!
I, God's slave, Matej, branch of Ninoslav, great viceroy of Bosnia, swear unto the prince of Dubrovnik
Dubrovnik's Zan Dandole (Gianni Dandolli) and all the regions of Dubrovnik.
I swear just as Ban Kulin swore before me:
For the Vlachs to walk freely as they did in the time of Ban Kulin, freely without deceit and evil...thus if a Vlach deceives a Serb, may he be held in the Ban's court.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

amerinako
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 1:29 PM 

The Charter of Matej Ninoslav, son of Radivoj, 1240

[linked image]

Tvrtko Kotromanic was crowned as 'the King of SERBS, Bosnia, the Seacoast and Western Parts" on the grave of St. Sava in the Mileseva. In order to emphasize the relationship of the Nemanjic (Serb in Rascia, the first Serbian state within the borders of modern Serbia) and Kotromanic (Bosnian Serb) dynasties , Tvrtko puts before his own name, the title Stefan, which indicates that he is crowned. In this letter the name Stefan is mentioned often (see for example the last word in the first sentence), just as it is also emphasized in the letter the concept of "Serbian land" or "Serbs" (Srbljem) as one ethnic categorization. For example, in the fifth line, Tvrtko clearly indicates the roots of his 'parents of Serb nobility". Also, at the end of the letter, on the right side in big letters there is emphasized the title "King of the Serbs.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

amerinako
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 1:29 PM 

Òâðòêî Êîòðîìàíè ñå êðóíèñàî çà êðàà Ñðáà, Áîñíå, Ïîìîð¼à è Çàïàäíèõ ñòðàíà íà ãðîáó Ñâåòîãà Ñàâå ó ìàíàñòèðó Ìèëåøåâà. Êðóíèñàí ¼å ïî ïðàâîñëàâíîì îáðåäó, èàêî ¼å áèî êàòîëèê. Äà áè èñòàêàî ¼åäíîðîäíîñò äèíàñòè¼å Íåìàèà è Êîòðîìàíèà, Òâðòêî ñòàâà èñïðåä ñâîã êðøòåíîã èìåíà è èìå Ñòåôàí, øòî çíà÷è "âåí÷àíè" (îí༠êî¼è ¼å êðóíèñàí). Ó îâî¼ ïîâåè Òâðòêîâî èìå Ñòåôàí ñå èñòè÷å âåîìà ÷åñòî (ïîãëåäàòè ðåöèìî ïîñëåäó ðå÷ ó ïðâîì ðåäó), êàî øòî ñå ó ïîâåè ÷åñòî ïîìèå ñðïñêà çåìà èëè Ñðáå êàî ¼åäèíà åòíè÷êà îäðåäíèöà. Íà ïðèìåð ó ïåòîì ðåäó Òâðòêî ¼àñíî èñòè÷å ïîðåêëî "ðîäèòåà ìî¼èõ ãîñïîäå ñðïñêå". Èñòî òàêî, íà äíó ïîâåå, íà äåñíî¼ ñòðàíè, ¼å îãðîìíèì ñëîâèìà èñòàêíóòî, íà ïðâîì ìåñòó - êðà Ñðáà.

Tvrtko Kotromanic se krunisao za kralja Srba, Bosne, Pomorja i Zapadnih strana na grobu Svetog Save u manastiru Mileseva. Krunisan je po pravoslavnom obredu, iako je bio katolik. Da bi istakao jednorodnost dinastije Nemanjica i Kotromanica, Tvrtko stavlja ispred svog krstenog imena i ime Stefan, sto znaci "vencani" (onaj koji je krunisan). U ovoj povelji Tvrtkovo ime Stefan se istice veoma cesto (pogledati recimo poslednju rec u prvom redu), kao sto se u povelji cesto istice srpska zemlja ili Srblje kao jedina etnicka odrednica. Na primer u petom redu Tvrtko jasno istice poreklo "roditelja mojih gospode srpske". Isto tako, na dnu povelje, na desnoj strani, je ogromnim slovima istaknuto, na prvom mestu - kralj Srba.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.

amerinako
(Login amerinako)

Re: Is Turkey Bosnia’s mother?

No score for this post
November 17 2008, 1:30 PM 

Ïîâåà áîñàíñêîã êðàà Ñòåôàíà Äàáèøå
Povelja bosanskog kralja Stefana Dabise

Ïðåâîä ïðâà äâà ðåäà: "Ó èìå Îöà è Ñèíà è Ñâåòîãà Äóõà Àìèí. Ìè Ñòåôàí Äàáèøà ïî ìèëîñòè Ãîñïîäà Áîãà êðà Ñðáà (¼åäèíà åòíè÷êà îäðåäíèöà ó èíòèòóëàöè¼è), Áîñíå, Ïîìîð¼à, Õóìñêå çåìå, Äîèõ Êðà¼à, Çàïàäíèõ ñòðàíà, Óñîðå, Ñîëè è Ïîäðèà (èíòèòóëàöè¼à ïî îáëàñòèìà - çåìå êî¼èìà âëàäàð âëàäà èëè êî¼èìà ïðåòåíäó¼å äà âëàäà)."

Prevod prva dva reda: "U ime Oca i Sina i Svetoga Duha Amin. Mi Stefan Dabisa po milosti Gospoda Boga kralj Srba (jedina etnicka odrednica u intitulaciji), Bosne, Pomorja, Humske zemlje, Donjih Kraja, Zapadnih strana, Usore, Soli i Podrinja (intitulacija po oblastima - zemlje kojima vladar vlada ili kojima pretenduje da vlada)."


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
 
< Previous Page 1 2 Next >
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Find more forums on PoliticsCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2017 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement