. THUS FORUM .  |
| Smyrna/Izmir |
  |
|
Post new message in this thread
Date: January 12, 2001 05:12 AM
Author: Ismail Nalbantoglu
(ismail.nalbantoglu@port.ac.uk)
Subject: Symrna
Dear participants, friends and other interested parties, I would like to know
all the information available on "Who really burned the Symrna (Izmir)". Two
main scenarios are: 1. Defeated Greek troops burned the City as well as the
other towns and the villages in the region when they were withdrawing their
troops. 2. Victorious Turkish Nationalist troops burned the city for revenge
(because of they believed Izmir's Greek population collaborated with the enemy).
Or maybe something else not known by the both sites (Extra- terrestrial
activities, British provocation, Act of God, In the name of art, etc...). Please
do write to me. I genuinely want to know. I am also interested in the reasons
behind the action (WHY? and for WHAT PURPOSE?). If you try to be clever, you can
even send some documents (academic or otherwise) to prove your point. I look
forward to hearing from both sides (Turks and Greeks) in the near future, Many
thanks. Saygilarimla, best regards.
(http://www.forumhost.com/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=49&Message_ID=16172)
Date: September 01, 2001 01:38 PM
Author: Photius (Photius@Photius.com)
Subject: PERSPECTIVE
An incident is a bit like a snapshot, so, one may want to see the whole
movie before drawing conclusions.
To put things in perspective, I like to look a bit further back in history.
First, let's keep in mind that the Western Powers and Russia purposely
conspired to partition the Ottoman Empire via the arousal of nationalistic
fanaticism (a la Milosevich) and also via falsification of the very identities
of the inhabitants of the fallen Roman Empire.
The Roman Empire, which for a millennium was centered in Constantinople,
was ravaged by Frankish and other tribes who had conquered its Western
territories, including the by then irrelevant city of Rome. When non-Roman
feudal "nobles" were appointed bishops in the West and subsequently the Roman
Popes were succeeded by non-Romans, under the gun, a further assault was
attempted via demonization of the East as "Greek", i.e., pagan and heretic.
For centuries, to be Roman had meant to be a Christian citizen of the Roman
Empire, and the identity of the empire to the Romans, i.e., to the multitudes
of its citizens from various ethnic groups and languages, meant the Church,
the Roman Orthodox Church, which is the one currently headed by the Ecumenical
Patriarch in Istanbul and the ancient patriarchates of Jerusalem, Alexandria
and Antioch.
While the patriarchates of the East fell to the Arabs and the Turks, the
Bishop of Rome, with help from the Franks and other Westerners was transformed
into a politically powerful, non-Roman institution that differentiated itself
from the Roman Church (i.e., of New Rome Constantinople, the church of the
true Roman Empire) via Augustine's heresy, a monstrous falsification of
Christianity that persists to this day in the Catholic and Protestant
churches, and which has colluded in all manner of inhumanity, from the Spanish
inquisition to recent enslavement of Africans and the Holocaust.
The plunder of Constantinople by the Franks, Venetians and Normans and the
other assaults of the Constantinople-based Roman empire were further attempts
to destroy the Church, which stood as the enduring identity of true Romanity.
It is interesting to note that when Sultan Mehmet II conquered
Constantinople, i.e., the last remaining significant piece of the Roman
Empire, there was no Ecumenical Patriarch. The Patriarchate had been latinized
during the Latin Occupation of Constantinople (which was the true devastation
of the Roman empire), and subsequent to its liberation by the Roman Emperor in
exile Michael VIII Palaeologus and protracted civil war, the Roman rulers
(i.e. of Constantinople) had tried to elicit help from the West to defend the
City from the Turks by offering to unite Christianity under the Latin Pope.
Help did not materialize.
When peace came under Ottoman rule, the clergy of Constantinople elected
George Scholarius as Genadius, Patriarch of Constantinople New Rome. This was
done under the "millet" system established by the Turks. The result was a
revival of the Church, which would have died for ever had the Franko-German
dominated Latins prevailed.
It is with this in mind that I, as a Greek speaking descendent of Orthodox
Romans, feel a great debt to the Turks.
Similarly, the conquering Arabs preserved the other three Orthodox Roman
patriarchates in Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria, not to mention propagating
ancient Greek scholarship and translating from Greek to Arabic and then to
Latin the great works of our ancestors, which they passed on to the dark-aged
Westerners, spawning the so-called Renaissance.
What the great powers of the West and Russia did in more recent times was
the Balkanization of the former Romans, falsely changing their identities into
historical ethnic groupings, such as Hellenes, Arabs, Albanians, Serbs, etc.
The great Roman (Romeos) Rigas Phereos was turned over to Ottoman
authorities via an English-Russian conspiracy, because he stood for revival of
Romanity, which did not suit their purpose, namely the partitioning of the
Ottoman Empire into ethnically-based micro-states (remember Milosevich?). They
could not stand the thought of true romanity (i.e. the real Roman empire of
the East with its real Christian Church in the Eastern Patriarchates)
resurfacing after they so diligently tried for centuries to burry it by
conquest, falsification of history, lies, heresies and atrocities.
Unfortunately, the Greeks, who until very recently called themselves Roman
(Romioi) fell for this insidious Western ploy, so the 1848 constitution of
Greece, school books and public policy were designed to remove Romanity from the conscience
of the inhabitants of Greece, with bad consequences.
Among other peculiarities, we ended up with Greeks thinking of themselves
as ancient pagan Hellenes, as if centuries of great history and Christianity
never happened, and the Turks, in turn, rightfully protesting that, therefore,
the Aegean and Cyprus, which recently were Roman not Hellenic, cannot belong
to the neo-Hellenes.
With Turks having evolved into the mindset of multiethnic empire, like the
Romans that they succeeded, one could not expect them to react to the sudden,
expansionist, neo-Hellenic nationalism in a manner other than what was
displayed in Ataturk's time.
The destruction of the great city of Smyrna is a historical tragedy of
catastrophic magnitude that devastated the Greek psyche.
On the other hand, compared to the potential elimination of Roman
Christianity (the Eastern patriarchates) by the Latins, it is of lesser
significance.
I am forever grateful that, in spite of opportunities and causes to do
otherwise, the Turks safeguarded Christianity (Orthodoxy, as opposed to the
Western perversion by the same name), and I do hope that when they enter the
EU they will again save us from the encroaching enemy that
masquerades as Western civility.
(http://www.forumhost.com/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=49&Message_ID=19239)
Date: February 11, 2001 02:07 PM
Author: Petran (flegias74@yahoo.com)
Subject: What do you excpet to listen....
I think that you are a provacator. You can easily find a lot of links in net
about this field but my opinion is that you are a provocator,Propably your boss
is afraid of the greek-turkish friendship and he is trying to spread hate
between each other...So fuck off and dont ever thought to come here or in other
site pretending the researcher:) OKAY ? P.S: The burning of Smyrni happened in
the name of War & Hate
(http://www.forumhost.com/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=49&Message_ID=16780)
Date: February 12, 2001 08:32 AM
Author: Ismail
Nalbantoglu (ismail.nalbantoglu@port.ac.uk)
Subject: Insult
There is no need for insulting messages. What is wrong with a discussion?
Are you afraid of something? Please do not send me messages which claim such
insulting remarks. I really do not understand, what your problem is? Please
stop being paranoia about everything. Ismail Nalbantoglu
(http://www.forumhost.com/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=49&Message_ID=16793)
Date: February 13, 2001 09:40 AM
Author: Petran (flegias74@yahoo.com)
Subject: Why you pretend ignorance ? You dont know what happened
then ?:)
Okay,Smyrne burnt in the name of turkish hate against greeks. The
Olocaute and the massacre of the Jews happened in the name of German hate
against jews. The Persians the Americans the Othomans the Arabs the
Byzantines the English and many many many others burnt killed and destroyed
civilasations,people, and cities... My problem is that you love the past and
what happened when the Facts are Facts and the Evidences are Evidences... I
think you should better look at the future and hoping to be peaceful, and
not reminding to us what happened then._
P.S:By the way 14 September will be the day of memory for the greekpeople
, and the land of Near-East(Ionia)--> Yesterday Decission of Greek
Government.
(http://www.forumhost.com/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=49&Message_ID=16815)
Date: February 13, 2001 09:41 AM
Author: Petran (flegias74@yahoo.com)
Subject: Why you pretend ignorance ? You dont know what happened
then ?:)
Okay,Smyrne burnt in the name of turkish hate against greeks. The
Olocaute and the massacre of the Jews happened in the name of German hate
against jews. The Persians the Americans the Othomans the Arabs the
Byzantines the English and many many many others burnt killed and destroyed
civilasations,people, and cities... My problem is that you love the past and
what happened when the Facts are Facts and the Evidences are Evidences... I
think you should better look at the future and hoping to be peaceful, and
not reminding to us what happened then._
P.S:By the way 14 September will be the day of memory for the greekpeople
, and the land of Near-East(Ionia)--> Yesterday Decission of Greek
Government.
(http://www.forumhost.com/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=49&Message_ID=16816)
Date: July 14, 2001 07:42 AM
Author: Istavroz (cherubius@hotmail.com)
Subject: Smyrna/Izmir
Petran, you stupid idiot. Do you think everyone in the world has been
submitted to the same views & history lectures as yourself? Mr. Nalbantoglus
efforts are sincere and constructive. An acedemic and serious look upon the
Izmir tragedy can only lead to more knowledge and more facts leading to a
greater understanding of the Truth. Moreover, it ensures that the historical
incident is not forgotten.
You on the other hand seem to want to bury it in the shadows of ancient
history, whereas remembering only the hate it unfortunately have led to.
The different explenations of the Fire is justified, as long as there are
diverging opinions. But some are more historical correct than others, some are
merely conspiracy theories of the lunetic fringe. But all UNBIASED and
DOCUMENTED academic research should be fully welcomed.
Dont forget that many people thought that it was the Communists who burned
down the German parliament, when in fact it was on Nazi initiative. Not
everything is always as simple as it looks.
Sincerely in the spirit of Brotherhood & Peace,
'The Cross'
(http://www.forumhost.com/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=49&Message_ID=18804)
Date: August 30, 2001 06:45 PM
Author: Photius (photius@photius.com)
Subject: PERSPECTIVE
An incident is a bit like a snapshot, so, one may want to see the whole movie
before drawing conclusions.
To put things in perspective, I like to look a bit further back in history.
First, let's keep in mind that the Western Powers and Russia purposely
conspired to partition the Ottoman Empire via the arousal of nationalistic
fanaticism (a la Milosevich) and also via falsification of the very identities
of the inhabitants of the fallen Roman Empire.
The Roman Empire, which for a millennium was centered in Constantinople, was
ravaged by Frankish and other tribes who had conquered its Western territories,
including the by then irrelevant city of Rome. When non-Roman feudal "nobles"
were appointed bishops in the West and subsequently the Roman Popes were
succeeded by non-Romans, under the gun, a further assault was attempted via
demonization of the East as "Greek", i.e., pagan and heretic.
For centuries, to be Roman had meant to be a Christian citizen of the Roman
Empire, and the identity of the empire to the Romans, i.e., to the multitudes of
its citizens from various ethnic groups and languages, meant the Church, the
Roman Orthodox Church, which is the one currently headed by the Ecumenical
Patriarch in Istanbul and the ancient patriarchates of Jerusalem, Alexandria and
Antioch.
While the patriarchates of the East fell to the Arabs and the Turks, the
Bishop of Rome, with help from the Franks and other Westerners was transformed
into a politically powerful, non-Roman institution that differentiated itself
from the Roman Church (i.e., of New Rome Constantinople, the church of the true
Roman Empire) via Augustine's heresy, a monstrous falsification of Christianity
that persists to this day in the Catholic and Protestant churches, and which has
colluded in all manner of inhumanity, from the Spanish inquisition to recent
enslavement of Africans and the Holocaust.
The plunder of Constantinople by the Franks, Venetians and Normans and the
other assaults of the Constantinople-based Roman empire were further attempts to
destroy the Church, which stood as the enduring identity of true Romanity.
It is interesting to note that when Sultan Mehmet II conquered
Constantinople, i.e., the last remaining significant piece of the Roman Empire,
there was no Ecumenical Patriarch. The Patriarchate had been latinized during
the Latin Occupation of Constantinople (which was the true devastation of the
Roman empire), and subsequent to its liberation by the Roman Emperor in exile
Michael VIII Palaeologus and protracted civil war, the Roman rulers (i.e. of
Constantinople) had tried to elicit help from the West to defend the City from
the Turks by offering to unite Christianity under the Latin Pope. Help did not
materialize.
When peace came under Ottoman rule, the clergy of Constantinople elected
George Scholarius as Genadius, Patriarch of Constantinople New Rome. This was
done under the "millet" system established by the Turks. The result was a
revival of the Church, which would have died for ever had the Franko-German
dominated Latins prevailed.
It is with this in mind that I, as a Greek speaking descendent of Orthodox
Romans, feel a great debt to the Turks.
Similarly, the conquering Arabs preserved the other three Orthodox Roman
patriarchates in Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria, not to mention propagating
ancient Greek scholarship and translating from Greek to Arabic and then to Latin
the great works of our ancestors, which they passed on to the dark-aged
Westerners, spawning the so-called Renaissance.
What the great powers of the West and Russia did in more recent times was the
Balkanization of the former Romans, falsely changing their identities into
historical ethnic groupings, such as Hellenes, Arabs, Albanians, Serbs, etc.
The great Roman (Romeos) Rigas Phereos was turned over to Ottoman authorities
via an English-Russian conspiracy, because he stood for revival of Romanity,
which did not suit their purpose, namely the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire
into ethnically-based micro-states (remember Milosevich?). They could not stand
the thought of true romanity (i.e. the real Roman empire of the East with its
real Christian Church in the Eastern Patriarchates) resurfacing after they so
diligently tried for centuries to burry it by conquest, falsification of
history, lies, heresies and atrocities.
Unfortunately, the Greeks, who until very recently called themselves Roman
(Romioi) fell for this insidious Western ploy, so the 1848 constitution of
Greece, school books and public policy were designed to remove Romanity from the conscience of the
inhabitants of Greece, with bad consequences.
Among other peculiarities, we ended up with Greeks thinking of themselves as
ancient pagan Hellenes, as if centuries of great history and Christianity never
happened, and the Turks, in turn, rightfully protesting that, therefore, the
Aegean and Cyprus, which recently were Roman not Hellenic, cannot belong to the
neo-Hellenes.
With Turks having evolved into the mindset of multiethnic empire, like the
Romans that they succeeded, one could not expect them to react to the sudden,
expansionist, neo-Hellenic nationalism in a manner other than what was displayed
in Ataturk's time.
The destruction of the great city of Smyrna is a historical tragedy of
catastrophic magnitude that devastated the Greek psyche.
On the other hand, compared to the potential elimination of Roman
Christianity (the Eastern patriarchates) by the Latins, it is of lesser
significance.
I am forever grateful that, in spite of opportunities and causes to do
otherwise, the Turks safeguarded Christianity (Orthodoxy, as opposed to the
Western perversion by the same name), and I do hope that when they enter the EU
they will again save us from the encroaching enemy that masquerades
as Western civility.
(http://www.forumhost.com/forums/Index.cfm?CFApp=49&Message_ID=19223)
Symrna
PERSPECTIVE