— The Erimtan Angle —

Archive for April, 2012

Erdoğan’dan Zehir Zemberek Sözler!

(29 Nisan 2012)


Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers

Robert Greenwald’s classic 2006 documentary is a damning indictment of the Bush invasion and occupation of Iraq: ‘The story of what happens to everyday Americans when corporations go to war. Acclaimed director Robert Greenwald (Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, Outfoxed) takes you inside the lives of soldiers, truck drivers, widows and children who have been changed forever as a result of profiteering in the reconstruction of Iraq. Iraq for Sale uncovers the connections between private corporations making a killing in Iraq (Blackwater, Halliburton/KBR, CACI and Titan) and the decision makers who allow them to do so’.[1]

The Scopes Monkey Trial, 1925

Formally known as The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes and informally known as the Scopes Monkey Trial—was a landmark American legal case in 1925 in which high school science teacher, John Scopes, was accused of violatingTennessee’s Butler Act which made it unlawful to teach evolution in any state-funded school.

This “legal precedent” has achieved a remarkable status today, due to the continued “debate” between Creationists and Evolutionists . . .


Emma Goldman: An Exceedingly Dangerous Woman

On a cold December morning in 1919, just aftermidnight, Emma Goldman, her comrade Alexander Berkman, and more than 200 other foreign-born radicals were roused from theirEllis Islanddormitory beds to begin their journey out of theUnited Statesfor good.

Convicted of obstructing the draft during World War I, Goldman’s expatriation came 34 years after she had first set foot inAmerica, a young, brilliant, Russian immigrant. For more than three decades, she taunted mainstreamAmericawith her outspoken attacks on government, big business and war.

Goldman’s passionate espousal of radical causes made her the target of persecution. Her sympathy for Leon Czolgosz, the assassin of President McKinley, brought down upon her the hatred of the authorities and the public at large. Feared as a sponsor of anarchy and revolution, she was vilified in the press as “Red Emma,” “Queen of the Anarchists,” and “the most dangerous woman in America.”[1]

[1] “More about the film Emma Goldman” PBS. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/goldman/filmmore/index.html.

Atheist or Agnostic??? Reasonable or Faithful???

I just stumbled across this video on Facebook. It is the astrophysicist Neil De Grasse Tyson explaining his position on the vexing issue of religion: ‘Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson claims the title “scientist” above all other “ists.” And yet, he says he is “constantly claimed by atheists.” So where does he stand? “Neil deGrasse, widely claimed by atheists, is actually an agnostic”’.

Richard Dawkins, “Darwin’s Rottweiler”, famously adheres to the same position, namely that there are certain things which cannot be known – “known unknowns”, as it were – and that he therefore is happy to state that he is an agnostic, adding however, “I think the probability of a supernatural creator existing is very very low”.[1]  It seems to me that admitting that one cannot be sure about the existence of a supernatural deity is but a natural and even logical thing to do . . . The recent phenomenon of New Atheism has produced many outspoken and aggressive atheist who are always talking about their belief in reason, somehow forgetting that the human being is not a reasonable creature. Man is an irrational animal that in the course of its evolution has achieved self-consciousness and a remarkable mastery over the natural world. Following the writings of the famous biologist Desmond Morris, one could describe man as a primate that has acquired carnivorous habits as a result of its changed habitat. From a forest-dwelling ape, happily feeding on freely available vegetables and fruits, man’s ancestor entered the wide open landscape and into competition with carnivorous wolves and big cats to ultimately become the most successful predator dwelling on earth. As a living thing, man’s ultimate fixation is procreation and the acquisition of digestible foodstuffs. Far from being a paragon of rationality, man is constantly subject to his or her sexual urges. Man’s ability to be cognizant of his (or her) own existence does turn him (or her) into a most peculiar animal, but at the end of the day, man is but an animal, man is but a naked ape wearing clothes as a means of controlling his (or her) constantly present sexual urges . . . Man is not controlled by reason, but by his procreational compulsion to ensure the survival of the species and the continuation of certain genetic material . . . and, to paraphrase Freud, civilization is but the outcome of a constant struggle to control the human sex drive . . . or as phrased by Adam Christian, “Freud notes that civilization’s antagonism toward sexuality arises from the necessity work of building communal bonds based on friendship. If the activity of the libido were allowed to run rampant, it would likely destroy the monogamous love-relationship of the couple that society has endorsed as the most stable”.[2]

[1] John Bingham, “Richard Dawkins: I can’t be sure God does not exist” The Telegraph (24 February 2012). http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9102740/Richard-Dawkins-I-cant-be-sure-God-does-not-exist.html.

[2] Adam Christian, “Chapter 5”, ‘Civilization and Its Discontents Summary and Analysis’. GrAdeSaver. http://www.gradesaver.com/civilization-and-its-discontents/study-guide/section3/.

2012 White House Correspondents’ Dinner

Jimmy Kimmel at the 2012 White House Correspondents’ Dinner.


Sarkozy and Gadhafi: €50 Million

During the bloody war in Libya, Gadhafi’s heir-apparent Saif al-Islam first alleged that Libyahad financed the French President Sarkozy’s election campaign . . . and now, these then-unproven claims have finally come out in the open and are being employed by the Socialist contender Hollande in a bit to further discredit the incumbent. Last month, EuroNews reported that ‘French President Nicolas Sarkozy has angrily denied accusations, during a live television interview, that he received money from deposed Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi to fund his first election campaign. The claims, reported in news website Mediapart, allege that the Libyan regime donated 50 million euros. “If he had funded it then I haven’t been very grateful,” responded Sarkozy who was reminded by the interviewer that Gaddafi’s son Saif al Islam had made the allegations. “I’m not sure that he makes a good witness.  Gaddafi, who is known for talking nonsense, has even said that there were cheques. Well ask his son to present them,” added Sarkozy. In March 2011 during an interview with euronews, Gaddafi’s son claimed that Sarkozy’s 2007 campaign had been funded by his father. “Sarkozy must repayLibya the money he took for his election campaign. We financed it. We have all the details and we are ready to publish them.  The first thing we ask of this clown Sarkozy is that he repay this money to the Libyan people. We helped him become president so that he would help the Libyan people but he has disappointed us.  And very soon we will publish all the details,” said Gaddafi. Saif al-Islam was captured in November 2011 trying to leaveLibya following the fall of the regime and his father’s death. There is confusion over whether he will face trial inLibya or at the International Criminal Court inthe Hague on charges of crimes against humanity’.

(13 March 2012)

And now, the allegations that Sarko received €50 million from the now assassinated Libyan leader are once more turning up in the French media. The ‘investigative website Mediapart released a report by French terrorism expert Jean-Charles Brissard. Its claims that Sarkozy secretly received Gaddafi’s millions for his previous election campaign are based on court testimony to an arms trafficking probe. The report alleges that French arms dealer Ziad Takieddine arranged the Gaddafi donation channeled via Panamaand a Swiss bank account in the name of a sister of one of Sarkozy’s key political allies, the head of his UMP party. The deal was said to be reached during one of Sarkozy’s frequent trips to Libyaas French interior minister, where he met Gaddafi in person. A memo obtained by Mediapart claims that a meeting on October 6, 2005 resulted in “campaign financing” of “NS [Nicolas Sarkozy]” being “totally paid”’, as reported by the ever-critical RT.[1]

Now, even the English-language Arabic broadcaster Al Jazeera highlights Sarko’s dealings with the dead Libyan dictator: ‘In the last days of campaigning for a second term as president of France, documents have surfaced which suggest Libya’s Gaddafi regime donated millions of dollars to Sarkozy’s 2007 election campaign. It’s not the first time that claim’s been made, and the French President’s camp has rejected it as “ridiculous.” Sarkozy’s Socialist challenger Francois Hollande is demanding an explanation. Al Jazeera‘s Charlie Angela reports from Paris’.

(28 April 2012)


[1] “Sarkozy fury over ‘Gaddafi millions for 2007 campaign’” RT (March 2012). http://rt.com/news/sarkozy-gaddafi-finance-campaign-443/.