TWO TINY ROCKS, TWO MODEST SUGGESTIONS

... "Thus, in the context of the above-mentioned necessity for confidence building initiatives, it would be suggested that (both or any of) the parties may take a courageous step and declare that the Kardak/Imia Rocks should not to be seen as a disputed territory between the parties anymore and should simply be delineated as a sort of special joint/common territory (some sort of condominium). Since the Kardak/Imia Rocks are only one of the disputed “geographic formations” in the region as emphasised above, such a declaration should also stress that the status of other “geographic formations” that (originally) share the same status would not be affected from this action in any manner. So, Greece and Turkey may well keep negotiating the status of other “geographic formations”." ....

The scariest thing is that the Turkish author is an International Law Scholar from the Faculty of Political Science, Ankara University according to his homepage.

Articles like this make me wonder about those ignorant Greeks believing in Greek-Turkish friendship. I guess Turkish international law graduates can easily transition from following international law when it is to Turkey's interest, but also become kadi court judges and preside over Greece's territorial and legal rights as they please.

Not one step back!

Not that this topic deserves a reply but here are my 2 cents.

You must be naive to believe in myths such as the existence of ignorant Greeks believing in Greek-Turkish friendship. I have yet to find one. On the other hand, thanks to several forumers, we, the Turks, became aware that the world was full of Greeks who hate anything that is remotely associated with the Turks.

Thanks for your bs about what Greek forumers say which matters little, but it is not Greek diplomats and statesmen trying to deny the Turkish nation its rights as codified in international law like the Turkish side is doing to Greece.

But FYI, in the 19th Century, the European Christian Great powers got together and developed the concept of "international law". Now for a neighbor modern Greece is having Turkey which obviously does not have the legal or civilizational background for respecting such a concept as inherent rights for all states. The Turks do seem to have respect for concepts of jihad, marytr, sehit, devlet, kadi courts, dhimmi, rayah, jiyza, etc. And it is with these Turkish/Muslim concepts that Turkish society and the Turkish state should be evaluated by Greeks because they are not Westerners, for sure, to be judging them by Western legal and historical traditions.

I think Texans have a very nice advise that reminds me why I shouldn't have replied to this message.
It talks about interspecies fights and one species liking it being in dirt.
If you are wondering about the saying, search google.

And yes, we Turks are the most barbaric race ever lived in this world. We eat the children alive and then piss on their mothers. All the crusaders who were/are trying to remove us from the face of the earth is actually doing a great service to the earth, and to the future generations. It is permissible to use all kinds of WMD on us, because the world needs to get rid of us as quickly as possible.

And all of the friends on the other side who stay silent for this kind of BS, I'm sorry but you lost my respect for the second time (I guess it doesn't matter).

we ll obviously you are not looking at the right place.....and before you start crying on how the world is full of big bad Greeks that hate your guts...... since when did you become Mr Friendship? are you under the impression that Greeks are programmed to hate Turks? do you think you have a friendly stance here in this forum that should deserve a much friendlier treatment?you hate people-they hate you back..thats how it works,and as far as i am concerned we arent the ones that started this vicious circle

Saladin, thanks for telling us how much you do not want to post in this topic and then posting irrelevant comments to derail the thread.

All I did was post a small quote from a shocking article I found by a Turkish legal scholar giving "suggestions" since obviously he knows it has no legal basis, that the "Kardak rocks" be shared to promote "peace". I attached to that post a comment of my own speculating such a suggestion since it has no legal grounds is from the Turkish muslim heritage of law, the kadi court tradition regarding Christian property and rights. It is obvious to me why a Turk would want to derail such a thread, since unlike me I do not see other Greeks out there judging Turkey by its own historical institutions.

Anyway, I hope others besides chris450 will not reply to Saladin's offtopic comments and turn this thread into something it is not, because that is what Saladin wants. Why would I bother to search for a Texan saying? Do you think I care? The time it takes to do that I can digicam and post a thread in the History scection with Turkish/Ottoman history scholars giving a summary of kadi courts. I already have done this with the threads Dar-al-Harb, Dar-al-Islam, Gazi and Gaza, with more to come, stay tuned in.

Did you know that once the CIA made a map with an AGEAN federation? :blink:

I scanned from Al-Mawardi, Abu'l-Hasan 'Ali ibn Muhammad. Al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyaya. Cairo (Mahmudiyya), p. 61-63. a passage from a compilation edited and translated by Bernard Lewis in the thread titled Kadi Courts. So I am not just making up things in all my comments.

I have yet to hear one of the Greek diplomats/news correspondents/political analysts/politicans say something to the effect that "Greece is entitled to international law not kadi courts" and propose a policy to such an effect, at the expense of Turkish policy seeks to deny Greece its rights. A Turkish policy which on all levels, from even what should be an innocent international law scholar "proposing peace" is hostile thanks to the weight of muslim history.

Probably if I was born Turk I would think sharing Kardak was peace and a great innovation in conflict resolution. But I was not...

indepence-dayesque i know but could not resist:
" Nobody is perfect" captain. get over it.

Just to remember

Through the Treaty of Lausanne signed in 1923 Turkey formally ceded the Dodecanese islands to Italy (Article 15). Due to a dispute regarding the islets between the island of Castellorizo and the Turkish coast, Italy and Turkey concluded on 4 January 1932 the Convention Between Italy and Turkey for the Delimitation of the Territorial waters Between the Coasts of Anatolia and the Island of Castellorizo.

On the same day, through an exchange of letters initiated by Turkey between the Turkish Foreign Minister and the Italian Ambassador to Turkey, it was agreed that the two sides would extend the already established delimitation to cover the whole of the Dodecanese region. A follow-on agreement was signed to this effect on 28 December 1932. It continues the delineation of the border line between the Dodecanese and the Turkish coast of Anatolia using 37 points and refers explicitly to the islets of Imia/Kardak as belonging to the Italian (and therefore, since 1947, to the Greek) side. More precisely point no. 30 reads, in the original French text:

"La ligne frontiere […] passe par les points suivants: […] 30.- a moitie distance entre Kardak (Rks.) et Kato I. (Anatolie)"

even the passage above is in french its rather easy to understand the kind of "dispute"

You make good points gents, and make your cases support them well. Its true that if your an outsider you might think compromising is a reasonable solution. What they don't understand is that we would be acting a resolution to a problem that is fabricated. If there is no REAL dispute, any "solution" would be a loss for us and a gain for them. Facts are facts. IMO We should start maiking our own claims on Imvros, Tenedos, Izmir, Istanbul, etc... Than we could reach a compromise on those issues. Fair, no?

Good point. I understand that it is only a perspective as far as the Turks are concerned, but we never crusaded against them or occupied them until they did it first. But then of course they would "find" evidence to show otherwise So the initiation and reconsilment should come at least from them and, reasonably, make the greater concesions. You didn't see blacks in etc. France to have to give up some consessions for the gov in order to get his freedom... Point being that if anyone should claim anything it should be us.

But sometimes law and politics seem to be conducted like a bazar rather than what they are. I dont know why the Turks don't just go to the Hauge if their claims are so legitimate... And to any doubters, yes we and IMO both of us want peace an prosperity in the end...

Fantasma, I did not post this article extract to have a fruitless debate with the Turks on the legal status of "Kardak rocks". The Turks as a nation have problems to sort out before they can accept legal arguments as being valid since they seem to only accept arguments created by the religious devlet state which they are worshipping. If you want to make international law based arguments you are better off making such arguments where there are non-Turks posting that can appreciate international law and what it stands for.

I remember watching this documentary The Corporation, in this documentary, they said that today even states have property like corporations do: their coastal waters and national airspace. The Turkish state has already confiscated all the property worth confiscating from the Greek minority until the 1960s. Starting in the 1960s they began to challenge the status quo in the Aegean with fighter plane violations. So they only started to attempt deprive the Greek state of its property after they already did the same with the Greek minority to huge success with the Greek state doing nothing to challenge them. I scanned in pages 201-203 of Mechanism of Catastrophe about the 1995 pogrom where the US State Department castigated the Greek government after the Turkish pogrom to restore NATO harmony immediately! So what does the stupid modern Greek political class do? They make a lame thesis to Europeanize Turkey through the European Union! So they have not learned enough about what the enhanced NATO status allowed Turkey to do to harm Greek interests, they want Turkey in the European Union.

This is why I posted this thread, it is time to realize muslim Turkey's policies from the vantage point of muslim history and institutions which cannot help but to be hostile. No kadi courts!

hi,
my friend do u realy belive there are kadý courts ? in Turkey ??

it is ture that there are very islamist peole in turkey nearly the % 10 persantage but basics of our legislative law is taken from switzerland in 1925 1927 between these years.

religion type courst ended in otoman empiracy at the end of 1850 s in the monernization times. and after the revolution monarchy the padisah gone. we still have the islams leadership as seyh ül islam. but atatürk band it and didnt let it any body have it. so for the last 80 years people fight for it.

religion is poison for both sides . and as u know we are a secularist state for again 80 years.
even most of u see our military parades in the vip loca there is no holy guys . no priest no hocas.

we dont let them inter fearour world business.
but on the other hand by the help of Usa 1970 till today number of mosques in creased 70 000 just in Turkey.

if we loose our secularizm.. then it will be very interesting to see kadýcourts in turkey after 150 years later.

iran saudi arabia iraq yemen quatar and uarap emirates . courts basicly bases on quran . not ours!.

and for kardak if there were only civilian s there would be a war . both armies comanders avoid the war. some times they are more wiser than the politicians.

Turkey is alittle bit difrent than u think ! alittle east alittle west and lots of mixture.
stay well.

Kaan

Kokoro, I know modern Turkey does not have full blown Islamic style kadi courts, but the legacy of kadi courts and the debasements of non-muslim testimony is a strong trend in modern Turkey. I have posted some summaries from Speros Vryonis study of the 1955 pogrom and he maintains that in the Yassiada trials, unlike in the earlier civil proceedings not a single person was proesecuted for the bodily harm done to the Greek minority. They were only charged for constitutional violations and the violations of the property of non-muslims. Another better proof is this forum and the discussions contained which show how strong this trend of kadi justice is in the Turkish nation.

Chapter 6: War and Peace in the Islamic Tradition and International Law

by Ann Elizabeth Mayer

INTRODUCTION

Historical Background

The Islamic tradition on questions of war and peace bears a different historical relationship to international law than does the Western one, a factor that may account for the dissimilar orientations of persons writing on war and peace in these two traditions. In this regard it should be recalled that the West today deals with international law as a familiar and integral component of Western civilization that has evolved pari passu with Western culture and religion over centuries. In contrast, the Islamic doctrines on war and peace have been part of a juristic culture that has remained closer to its premodern roots.

Although Islam is a younger religion than Christianity, its tradition on war and peace coalesced earlier than the Christian one did. The sources of the tradition were rules in the Qur'an, which dates from the seventh century C.E., and the example of the Prophet Muhammad (d. 632 C.E.) in matters involving warfare and the conduct of statecraft. The Islamic law on war and peace was elaborated by jurists during the centuries after the Prophet's death. Thus as early as the eight century C.E. one has the important treatise by the Sunni jurist Muhammad al-Shaybani (d. 805 C.E.), Al-Siyar al-kabir. On the Twelver Shi'i side, the law on war was largely established at the time of the influential treatise Al-Nihaya by Abu Ja'far al-Tusi (d. 1067 C.E.). 1

Book Title: Just War and Jihad: Historical and Theoretical Perspectives on War and Peace in Western and Islamic Traditions. Contributors: James Turner Johnson - editor, John Kelsay - editor. Publisher: Greenwood Press. Place of Publication: New York. Publication Year: 1991. Page Number: 195.

I found the above while browsing Questia.