I am .....

I am ... is used quite commonly in the past few years. Especially in the past years. Maybe after the new millenia, the use of ''I am....'' became more commonly used. But for what?

I am Armenian.
I am Jew.
I am Palestinian.
I am Hrant Dink.
I am Kurdish.
I am Black.
I am Roman.
And lately it became I am Charlie
And I am Ahmed! 
And I am Muslim! 

This list goes on like this a lot more.. But for what? When I say ''I'm Black'', do I become black in race? Or same thing goes for saying that I was Armenian doesn't necessarily make me an Armenian. Not that it's a good or bad thing, it's just something else.

When I say ''I'm.....'', this clearly means that I understand the situation these people are and that I give my full support to them.

Saying something you in fact are not is more precious than being that and not supporting the one from your race/religion etc. This saying is very important.

Martin Niemöller's saying is one of my favourite things to say..

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

 Speaking out our say in world's matter makes us a part of the world. Staying silent means we're not interested in the world's matters, including the ones around us.. 

There is one more thing I want to add: What would happen if I only could be human. Besides, isn't it our only common identity: To be a human being. If I really am supposed to be something, I choose to be a human instead of all the identities/categories/religions etc.

Long time ago, a man goes to Germany for asylum. He's from Kars, Turkey and he seeks political asylum from Germany. When his case is taken to the court, he's assigned a translator and starts to answer the questions of the judge. When the judge asks him why he wanted to live in Germany, he first warns the translator to translate exactly what he says. The translator protests but then obeys. He starts to say:
- I am a human being on this planet. And I choose Germany to live in it. Who are you to tell me otherwise? Who can tell me not to?
The translator looks at him first and then starts to translate it. Everybody is shocked with this answer. People think that he'll be deported. The judge says: Your wish is quite reasonable. So, you're hereby given the permit to reside in here.

What would happen if it were only that simple? 

Charlie Hebdo and more..

I was at my tango class when I first heard of the accident/murder in Soma mines. I really couldn't take my head off from the situation. The number of people in the mines was unknown. Later, a lot later, I could learn the real immensity of the accident. 301 people were murdered in the mines in Soma and the Prime Minister Erdoğan told that it was fate and this kind of accidents were in this business' reality.
 

I first heard of Charlie Hebdo with their cartoon of Prophet Mohammad. In Islam it's forbidden to have or even to draw his picture. The main reason is to avoid making him a tin god by his followers. However, they did draw his cartoon and massive protest took place all around Europe and even in the whole world. When I heard of this, I thought that it was thoughtless action of them. Drawing a religiously important figure especially when it was forbidden was a reckless and careless and inconsiderate action for me. Let me clearly state that criticizing is one thing, killing and justifying it with the criticism is another. On the other hand, freedom of expression is one thing and making fool of a religious figure is another. We would make a grave mistake if we mix those important things.

Yesterday, I heard about the attack at Charlie Hebdo. They published a cartoon of the head of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (I don't call leader, because I don't believe real leaders would make his followers murder anybody for any cause, let alone murdering innocent kids and women and elders) Just after a few hours of the publishing, this attack took place.

Mainly in Europe but also in all around the world protests condemning this attack took place with millions of people..  I thought why there were no such protests when ISIS drove Ezidi people and kids died of hunger and thirst in the mountains. This may sound really easy to say but I believe the main reason is that the attack on Ezidi people didn't take place right in the heart of Europe but in Iraq! If anyone has another explanation, I'd love to hear it.

Not long before, al-Baghdadi told his followers to commit acts of terror in Europe and USA and the "coalition countries". This action reminded us that in today's world, we were safe nowhere..

This situation also got me thinking, who is behind ISIS? Big big governments and big big corporations in my mind. Nothing else. If you want peace at home, you also should want peace in the world. If you think it's none of your damn business, you're so wrong, you may even pay the consequences with your life one day..There is a very simple reason for this: This is a real global village and your government's policy in another part of the world brings the results back to you. If your government sells guns, those guns, one day, may/will turn against you too..

In general I don't believe in terrorism, but consequences. If a power is removed, another power takes its predecessor's place almost instantaneously. If a government is removed from power, this will cause some balance changes in this country. And whether you like it or not another party will come and will claim the power. If you disregard one of the minorities of your country and try to assimilate them, they'll want to rise up and claim what's their right. One person, may it be al-Baghdadi or Adolf Hitler or Osama bin Laden, says that their rights were taken and that they need to get back what's theirs, thousands and sometimes even millions may follow this one person. Religions, in this regard, is one of the most powerful reasons for people to unite around one, against another.

It's not just today's problem. In the past, think about the crusades. They were formed to prevent any action against the Catholic countries/empires. The person, who called the crusades was none other than the Pope. The Catholic countries/empires were threatened within or from outside and they came together to fight against these threats.

What I really want to say is that when there is injustice in some part of the world, when someone kills in the name of something, one first should ask the question "Why?", then start to blame. There is no justification for any killing. Nothing is more sacred than a life, may it be a human's life or an animals.. Judging from what's on the surface is the easy part. Looking below the iceberg for the reasons is the hard one.


There was this photo I once saw. A photo of an island, which was thousands of kilometres from Alaska. There were dead birds, in which was full of plastic trash.







This is another bird with its stomach full of pastic trash too.

In this world or rather global village, even if you live on a deserted island,  you'll not be away from world's issues. They'll find you eventually, somehow. 

I read this when I was a school boy: 

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

This was written by Martin Niemöller to criticize German intellectuals not speaking-up against rising Nazi power in Germany. I like this trend of saying "I am ....." Dots are to be filled with the victim person's name or nation. I like it because this reminds me of being one! We should not be different people. We should be one to have a say in this world's matters.

If we want to stop such tragedies from happening, it's time to act and say no to both ISIS and to our weaponising governments and start to listen and understand each other. 

News from İstanbul - June 25, 2013

Yesterday we received news from the court, which was suing Ethem Sarısülük's murderer policeman. The news was no good. The police was set free by the court. The reason was self-defence, thus he shot Ethem. However, there is one point: He was almost 5m (app. 17ft.) away from Ethem, when he shot his gun and then ran away. None of the protesters had any sort of gun or similar weapon. How can you explain this? You cannot, if you're not in Turkey.

In Turkey, unfortunately, such things are quite common. When you work for the government, either officially or unofficially, you are always protected. Sometimes by the public prosecutor, sometimes by the judge, sometimes by members of parliament or even the head of state. This was confessed by the first and only female prime minister of Turkey, Tansu Çiller. She said 'The one who shoots and who is shot for the government is from us!' The time was 90s and the government had many squads in eastern and especially south eastern Turkey, to murder local Kurdish politicians. They murdered so many that no one knows the exact number of people assassinated.

It was 90s and now we're in 2013. What has changed? Almost nothing. Except, back then, the state was governed by a right wing political coalition, helped and supported by the army. And now an Islamist government is in power for the last 10 years and there is no military force behind them.

Some of us are really sorry that words fail to express our feelings. And some thinks it was self-defence and even thinks that the person killed deserved to be killed. The worst thing is that we're becoming used to it. Being used to what the state do to us. When violence is in the monopoly of the state, you have nothing to say and nothing to do.