European Politics

A little humour on another dark day ...

media_xll_8509114.jpg
 
U.S. arrests Turkish businessman accused of evading Iran sanctions

This news has the possibility to shake the air of politics in Turkey. Reza Zarrab, an Iranian born Turkish businessman was arrested by the U.S. for money laundering, illegal transactions, fraud and evading U.S. sanctions. Why this might shake things up in Turkey? Reza Zarrab was the central figure of the government corruption scandal of late 2013. Many members of the government, including four ministers, were accused of taking part in Zarrab's money laundering advances by accepting massive bribes to allow him to conduct financial transactions through Turkish companies. The recorded tapes of the parties involved talking on phone were made public through YouTube, which resulted in a ban of the site for a while. They went through the trials unscathed but the law system in Turkey is well known to be corrupt in favor of the government. Members of the government had made a tremendous effort to portray Zarrab as a proper businessman and a philanthropist who worked for Turkey's well being after the initial accusations in 2013.

His reported ally, Babak Zanjani, was recently convicted in Iran for the exact same reason and sentenced to death penalty.

Zarrab travelling to the U.S. while being aware of his case in the light of Zanjani's sentence raises question marks. He might have done it on purpose to turn himself in and let the American and Turkish governments go through the process. The guy is obviously in the know about the corruption in Turkey. If he talks, shit might hit the fan.
 
Last edited:
The bearded version is his Dr. Dabic disguise. In that role, he was seen in the small island town about a mile from my summerhouse, and complimented the new local church - 'you have a very nice temple'. A neighbour saw him enjoying beverage on the terrace next door. This was some time before his arrest.

Bastard should've been put into a bus, taken into a forest, shot in a head and left to rot.
 
Yeah he actually lived the life. We imagined that he's really into hiding somewhere ala Mladic. Or Gotovina for that matter, but he was abroad.
 
The bulk of the sentences on all three sides came down on military leaderships. They're given life. Politicians not.
 
No it doesn't. It's not Europe's Muslims that hate the West, it's particular Muslims such as those that were responsible for the attacks that perhaps hate the West. I know plenty of Muslims living in Europe that love the West.
 
That assessment couldn't be more wrong. Whenever I hear from Turks that live in Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, France, Switzerland, Austria and so on and come to Turkey for a visit, they can't shut up about how great those countries are. Whatever you say, they'll respond with: "Well, in Germany, we do it like this and it's better". (It probably is better, but you get the idea that it can be annoying)
 
Last edited:
Anecdotal evidence from both of you. Yes I have some too, Germany is full of Turks that love to be in Germany etc. but that's not the point. That's not actual generation of migrants, this article is talking about them. If you have any evidence otherwise, please provide, akin to this professor in article that pulled out some stats from polls etc.
 
Zare, your argument is inherently flawed because it's coming from a collectivist point of view. The problem is not because of the people who support the religion, the problem is the religion itself is in desperate need of reformation, much like other religions have done in the past. I attribute Christianity's path to reformation beginning during the Thirty Years War, when the French, predominately a Catholic based nation, used the political theory of politique to support the Protestant Sweden against the Catholic Holy Roman Empire because they prioritized politics over religion. Gustavus Adolphus made a large amount of gains whilst Sweden were on the offensive, whilst the French supported them. This then transitioned into a French offensive against the HRE when Gustavus died, and eventually, a peace treaty was made. This helped generate religious tolerance between Protestants and Catholics, as well as other Christian branches.

Islam has never had this. Their doctrine is based on imperialism and consolidating for conquered people, which whilst an efficient way to expanding land in times old, is very much a bad idea back then and especially in this time period. Most Muslims, both Shia and Sunni are able to practice their religion in peace, even fundamentalists, but their remain a select few who feel Islam is entitled to the same opportunity that Judaism was given with the birth of modern Israel, except on a wider scale due to the Umayyad conquests, stemming through Northern Africa and into Iberia. This is one of the main reasons that ISIS exists.

It's an incorrect assumption to say that Islam is a religion of peace, because their doctrine proves otherwise. However, in present day, most believers in Islam can practice their religion in peace. Don't place the blame on Muslims, place the blame on the fundamentalist flaws that come with Islam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top