Istanbul Archaeology Museums, which were established as Müze-i Humayun (Empire Museum) by the famous artist and museum director Osman Hamdi Bey at the end of the 19th century, were opened to public on June 13, 1891. Besides its importance as the “first Turkish museum”, it has an importance and specialty of being one of the museum buildings that are constructed as a Museum in the World. Today, it still protects its outstanding place in the World’s biggest museums with its works more than a million belonging to various cultures. 
In the museum collections, there are rich and very important works of art belonging to various civilizations from the regions from Balkans to Africa, from Anatolia and Mesopotamia to Arab Peninsula and Afghanistan that were in the borders of the Ottoman Empire.
Category: Authors
-
İstanbul Archeology Museums
-
What Goes Around Must Come Around Chapter16
WHAT GOES AROUND MUST COME AROUND
IT CAN NOT HAPPEN TO ME. GUESS WHAT? It will !!!
Chapter 16
On February 10, 1941 then Senator Harry S Truman made a speech telling the [1]Senate what he had found on his investigations of government waste in the war effort. The Senate passed his resolution and authorized $15,000 and made him Chairman.
That was the beginning of the “Truman Commission.” It saved the taxpayers over $15 BILLION dollars and saved thousands of soldiers lives. FDR even encouraged Truman to look into certain areas. Every report made by the committee was unanimous. During the course of the war the committee’s budget was increased from the initial $15,000 to $300,000. That is amazing considering how today this congress is so divided.
Because of his positive efforts as a fine senator FDR chose him to become his vice President when he ran for a fourth term.
Truman felt that people dealing with government funds , whether they are local, state or national have very little respect for those funds.
It is my belief that when you have a boom period, people become very sloppy because IT IS NOT THEIR MONEY. Then when times are tough which is usually the case after a boom period- good times can not last forever-they get too dependant upon those loose funds and create clever schemes to cover up their begotten gains.
A perfect example of this is what went on with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the two giant government mortgage agencies that are now controlled by the Federal Housing Finance Agency at the cost of over $150billion. They (bureaucrats) are trying to figure out what to do with them. These entities should be closed down immediately. The mortgages, if found, should be returned to the originating bank and serviced there interest free. I believe this is one of the reasons Collateralized mortgages (CMO”s) and derivatives were created as another way to fleece the public. The firms that created these monster fraud vehicles should be the ones to pay and forced to leave the business. This is a process of power and corruption. What goes around comes around. Too big to Fail should mean too big to save. The public worked hard to save and invest for a home, it is the politicians and the bureaucrats that squandered their savings and ruined their dreams. They are trying to muddy the thought process by bringing up the fact that there are some folks who have been paying. If they can pay the principal then forgive the interest payments. Give them a second chance – not the politicians.
Some of these instruments have been traded into oblivion and should be trashed with the creator of these funny money obligations taking the loss. That is if they can be found. This will ultimately be a good savory bone for the beleaguered savings industry.
When a mortgage was submitted to the Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac those funds left the local community and fleeced the pockets of bureaucrats inWashingtonD.C…Simply put – more fingers tasting the pie.
IT BEHOOVES EVERY NEWLY ELECTED POLITICIAN IN EVERY DECOCRATIC FORM OF GOVERNMENT WORLDWIDE TO INVESTIGATE FOR WASTE AND CORRUPTION IN THEIR COUNTIRES. Some agencies should be dropped and other downsized and maybe some increased. The main purpose is to recover ill-gotten gains even if they were transferred to other entities. This will help bring down government deficits and reduce government debt. If Harry Truman’s committee saved billions of dollars in the early 1940’s; think of all the moneys that can be saved today. One of the wealthiest cities in the world today is WASHINGTON.DC.
Governments should not get into the people’s business, but they must set fair and honest rules so the participants are guaranteed an equal chance. Participants that break the rules should be severely punished.
[1] Plain Speaking An Oral biography of Harry S Truman, Chapter 13
Merle Miller
-
What brought you to Turkey?
Matt Krause writes about his time in Turkey in his new book, “A Tight Wide-open Space.”This week saw the opening meeting of the International Women of İstanbul’s 2011-2012 Season. What an amazing collection of hundreds and hundreds of women, from almost every nation on the globe, representing all ages and all walks of life.Some came to Turkey many decades ago, and have lived through coups, rapid economic development and mass urbanization. Some arrived on a plane last week. For some, Turkey is so much “home” that they can scarcely remember what life was like elsewhere; others are just passing through fleetingly.
Some ladies came to Turkey because their husband was posted here on business or in the diplomatic corps. Some are career women and came here on their own work assignment. Yet, others came because they fell in love with a Turkish man. Of these some have been happily married for a long time, while others, although their marriage ended in divorce, have stayed to be close to their children.
Some came for the adventure, some came for the experience of living somewhere different, some came to earn more money or to gain advancement along the career ladder, some came to get away from a situation abroad, some came for love, some came with a sense of duty, some came enthusiastically and full of hope and some came reluctantly, fearfully and grudgingly.
But whatever their story of how they came to Turkey, each and every one will be touched in some way by their time here. Perhaps older and wiser, perhaps hurt and disappointed, perhaps deeply enriched by the experience, but no one will leave the same person as they came.
What about you? What brought you to Turkey? What can you do to stack the odds so that your experience here is more likely to be a positive one for you personally?
An occasional contributor to this newspaper, Matt Krause came for love. He met a beautiful Turkish woman on a flight to Hong Kong, and unexpectedly moved to Turkey in 2003. In actual fact he uses the intriguing line, “I wouldn’t have been on that plane if my black lab Milk Dud had had better social skills,” which teases the reader so you’ve just got to read on.
His memoir on his time in Turkey starts with this thought-provoking poem about koi fish:
Put a koi into a fish bowl, and it will grow to three inches.
Put a koi into an aquarium, and it will grow to nine inches.
Put a koi into a pond, and it will grow to eighteen inches.
Put a koi into a lake, and it will grow to three feet.
The koi fills up whatever container you give it.
He titles his book “A Tight Wide-open Space,” neatly summing up the contradiction that is Turkey. But perhaps it is this conundrum that means our experience in Turkey can range from that of a koi in a fish bowl to that of a koi in a lake. How we view the people and our environment here determines how much we grow while here or how much we remain static and confined to our own self-imposed boundaries and limitations.
Matt has written an immensely readable and pleasing account of five years in Turkey. He came here for love. I am sure that very few would have been as decisive as he when his Turkish girlfriend announced she had decided to return to İstanbul: “I thought about if for about 10 seconds and said, ‘Well I’ll come with you’.”
This impulse was to lead him to a series of life-changing encounters, both dramatic and mundane. But they became life-changing because Matt allowed them to speak to him about his attitudes, his worldview and above all his values.
By marrying into the culture, Matt is exposed to Turkey in a detail that the casual visitor fails to experience. He gains a deep understanding of the individual/group perspective that differentiates his homeland from that of his wife. This underscores the whole story: Right from the very first words of his introduction where he portrays a family going together to purchase sacrifice meat at Kurban Bayramı, and the way all the generations gather with them to celebrate the feast. (By the way, not an introduction to be read by a squeamish vegetarian.)
He moves from a very isolated start, where his only contact is his girlfriend, to being part of a whole new extended family. The first is illustrated by his having to approach the request for a girl’s hand in marriage on his own, while this formal visit in Turkey is normally a meeting of two families: “While my girlfriend translated I also thought about her parents, especially about her father. How was he taking all of this? Would he feel insulted that my family was not here to do this in the proper Turkish way? Would he feel insulted that instead of speaking to the head of my family, someone his own age, he had to listen to a strange foreign kid speaking a foreign tongue?”
The latter is illustrated by his later realization of the qualities of his father-in-law: “For decades Mr. E has watched over his family like a protective hawk, providing love and support wherever it has been needed. Mr. E usually doesn’t even offer his help, he just shows up at your door and starts providing it.”
Krause’s descriptions are perceptive and delightful. This stems from his having reconciled his heart with Turkey. “When you love something, you understand that its good side and bad side are two sides of the same coin.”
If you are seeking just a simple boy-meets-girl, goes to her country and has some interesting and weird experiences tale, then you will find some of the morals Matt draws out somewhat preachy. Perhaps the book could have greater impact on its intended audience and a wider circulation if it were packaged not as a memoir of life abroad but as a personal development book challenging our worldview. A little bit of editing to bring the worldview-change issues to the fore and using the story of life as a backdrop to illustrate these would turn this from a cozy armchair read into a challenging life-coach.
He certainly has some challenging things to say about not judging all Muslims as terrorists (drawn out from a meditation about people whose name is Jihad) and understanding that fundamentalist doesn’t mean violent (we get there through a fantastic story about a lampshade shop).
Most of the episodes of experience he chooses to use in his collage are little gems; a few chapters are mundane, however. But the book is worth reading just for Matt Krause’s 95 percent/5 percent rule. Considering how the Abrahamic story is central to each of the three major monotheistic faiths, he concludes that we are 95 percent similar to, and only 5 percent different from, each other.
“Human nature being what it is, we humans focus on and obsess over the 5 percent. We plaster our headlines with the 5 percent. We think the 5 percent drives the world around us. What actually drives the world around us is the 95 percent. When we allow our obsession with the 5 percent to control our actions, we let the tail wag the dog.”
“A Tight Wide-open Space,” by Matt Krause, published by Delridge Press (2011) $12 in paperback ISBN: 978-146091043-6
-
“PKK Failed in Armenia”
We evaluated extremely important subjects and events in South Caucasus with Dr. Alexander MURINSON for Strategic Outlook readers. (more…) -
Where will People’s Mujahedin of Iran (or Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) enter Iran from?
Gulnara Inanch, mete62@inbox.ru
Director of Information and Analytical Center Etnoglobus (ethnoglobus.az), editor of Russian section of American-Turkish Resource website www.turkishnews.com
Foreign Ministry spokesman of Iran Ramin Mehmanparast has recently expressed his concern over the possibilities of provision a shelter in Azerbaijan to anti-Islamic regime People’s Mujahedin of Iran (MEK) by the US and Israel.
Mehmanparast, at the same time, has warned that neighbors should take into account sensitiveness of this issue toIran; otherwise Tehran’s response will be severe. Statement is not by chance.
It is another proof thatTehrantries to take preventive measures asIran’s statement is based on possibilities rather than true facts since West andIsraeluse Southern Azerbaijan national issue and internal and external anti-Iran regime in order to cause disorder inIran.
MEK’s survival began from 2009 when MEK was removed from the EU list of terrorist group. Besides between 2005-2009 MEK trained in the US military bases.
In April a group of American politicians asked for removal of MEK from the list of terrorist group. Such progress of the events enables us to believe that the offer will be accepted by the White House:
«OfficialTehranis concerned about MEK. This organization was established by Shah Pehlevi as a close power to him. As the organization was established on basis of interests, instead of ideas, it changed its position. MEK has strong support and reputation both in and outside ofIran. This is well-organized organization. Being not a nationalist group, it meets the demands of the west with regard to overthrow of political power ofIran».
MEK also has media organizations broadcasting in theUS. Although its TV broadcasting has been stopped for a while, it is expected to restore its broadcast for political pressure over Iranian government.
In April of this year US New Yorker magazine reported that MEK had received standard training that included communications, cryptography, small-unit tactics and weaponry. The training in theU.S.took place at the Department of Energy’s Nevada National Security Site. The article also says that the purpose of the trainings was to commit terror attacks inIran.
In order to penetrate into Iran MEK militants need to use territories of neighbor countries. However, permission of neighbor countries for it is not required. They may apply various methods that the terrorists use like entering different countries under different names through which they can enterIran.
To settle such well-organized and trained armed groups within the territories ofAzerbaijanis a dangerous as it might lead to destabilization in the country, as well as of statehood point of view. So,Azerbaijanitself would be interested in cooperation withIranto prevent MEK militants from access to the country.
Reference – People’s Mujahedin of Iran was founded in 1965 by a group of leftist Iranian university students. Although the goal was to establish a socialist republic inIran, they offered establishment of Tovhid society.
MEK carried out various terror attacks in Iranin the 1970s, then fought against Iranduring Iran-Iraq war. Despite recognition of new regime following Islamic Revolution MEK chose to struggle against Islamic regime after being subject to terror and torture. Group’s armed wing is called National Liberation Army of Iran whose leader is Masoud Rajavi.
source- New Baku Post
-
US Supreme Court May Hear First Ever Armenian Genocide-Related Lawsuit
For the first time, a lawsuit indirectly involving the Armenian Genocide is being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Since its initial filing in 2003, various federal courts have taken conflicting positions on this lawsuit.
Here is a brief background to the case: In 2000, the California legislature adopted a law — Section 354.4 of the California Code of Civil Procedure — extending to 2010 and subsequently to 2016 the deadline for Armenian Genocide victims or their heirs to file claims on insurance policies issued from 1875 to 1923 to persons living in the Ottoman Empire between 1915 and 1923.
In December 2003, several California Armenians filed a class action lawsuit in Federal Court against German insurance companies for refusing to pay the proceeds of life insurance policies purchased by their ancestors in the Ottoman Empire. The German companies, supported by the Turkish government, objected to the lawsuit and sought to have it dismissed. They claimed that the California law authorizing the lawsuit was unconstitutional because its reference to the Armenian Genocide conflicted with the federal government’s policy on this issue.
When the Federal District Court rejected the insurance companies’ argument on June 6, 2007, they appealed to a panel of three federal judges on the Ninth Circuit Court. In a 2-1 opinion, the judges ruled on August 20, 2009 that the California law conflicted with the Executive Branch’s foreign policy prerogative. The Armenian plaintiffs then sought a rehearing of the case by the same panel of three judges. On December 10, 2010, the majority of the judges ruled that the California statute did not violate the foreign affairs doctrine.
Unhappy with this reversal, the German companies appealed to the full (en banc) Ninth Circuit Court. By a unanimous decision, the panel of 12 federal judges ruled on February 23, 2012 that the California law was unconstitutional, as it “intruded on the federal government’s foreign affairs power.” Using the rarely-invoked doctrine of “field preemption,” the judges ruled that Section 354.4 was unconstitutional not due to any conflict with specific actions of the federal government, but because it dealt with an area of exclusive federal responsibility, namely foreign relations.
On June 22, 2012 Igor Timofeyev of Paul Hastings LLP, Counsel for the Armenian plaintiffs, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. He argued that this is the “perfect vehicle to clarify the foreign affairs preemption doctrine” and that “the Ninth Circuit’s unwarranted expansion of the field preemption doctrine would…imperil numerous state laws dealing with traditional areas of state competency.” Citing congressional and executive branch pronouncements favoring the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, Timofeyev pointed out that the US government not only did not object to the Armenian Genocide resolutions issued by various states over the years, but in fact welcomed them, as Pres. Obama had done in his statement of April 24, 2012.
Meanwhile, a Supreme Court ruling in another case may have improved the prospects for the Armenian appeal. Just days after Timofeyev filed his petition, the Supreme Court issued a ruling on an Arizona statute dealing with undocumented immigrants. The Arizona case raised the very issue that is at the heart of the Ninth Circuit’s en banc decision on Armenian insurance policies, namely whether a state law that could indirectly impact foreign relations in a particular area is subject to “field preemption” even in the absence of federal action in that area.
In ruling on the Arizona case, several justices found no preemption in the Arizona statute. Even the majority, which found some preemption in the Arizona statute, severely limited the application of the field preemption doctrine. Specifically, the Court ruled that, while states cannot act in an area where the federal government has a “complete,” “integrated and all-embracing” regulatory system, they can do so where the federal government has “expressed no more than a ‘peripheral concern’” or “done nothing to suggest it is inappropriate” for the states to act.
These statements provide strong support for overturning the Ninth Circuit’s en banc decision on the Armenian insurance claims. That point will no doubt be urged on the Supreme Court by the plaintiffs and in the amicus briefs to be filed by the Armenian Bar Association and others.
This lawsuit is basically about non-payment of valid insurance claims and not about genocide recognition. German insurance companies are shamefully exploiting the genocide issue simply to avoid paying long overdue benefits to insurance claimants.
It is not known at this time if the Supreme Court will take up this appeal, since it accepts for review only a small number of cases each year.