Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan Angers U.S., Israel, Egypt With Mursi Defense

[Purveyor]

Source: REUTERS

By Ayla Jean Yackley
ISTANBUL | Tue Aug 20, 2013 5:25pm EDT

(Reuters) - Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan angered Ankara's U.S. ally, as well as regional leaders in Egypt and Israel, by accusing Israel on Tuesday of helping overthrow Cairo's Islamist president.

The White House called the remarks "offensive".

Erdogan, who has become one of the fiercest critics of the Egyptian army's removal of Mohamed Mursi, told members of his Islamist-rooted AK Party that he had proof that Israel was involved in last month's ouster, which has been followed by a bloody crackdown on the elected president's Muslim Brotherhood.

"What do they say in Egypt? Democracy is not the ballot box. What is behind it? Israel. We have in our hands documentation," Erdogan said in comments broadcast by TRT state television.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/20/us-turkey-egypt-israel-idUSBRE97J0XX20130820

[geek tragedy]

1. When in doubt, blame it on the Jews.

Goebbels would be proud of the Turkish PM.

[branford]

3. Don't forget that he was also a strong supporter of Assad in Syria. And then there's Iran . . .

At least until Assad bombed Syrian targets and Turkey was inundated with refugees.

Erdogan is an Islamist, and blaming Jews and America is his modus operandi.

[Scootaloo]

13. Actually, he'd be more proud of you

Erdogan is saying Israel had a role in the coup. You're the one saying "Jews."

That is to say, Erdogan is accusing a political entity that has expressed in hte past a strong interest in interfering with Egypt to get results it favors, and who is right now praising the coup, has once again dipped its hands into the well of Egyptian politics in an effort to get a favorable result.

You however, are smacking this accusation not onto a nation with a track record of doing that sort of thing, but onto a religious-ethnic group that spans the world and, for the most part, is not within Israel. Do you see the difference?

Now, what you want to say, is that Erdogan has no evidence of his claims and that this is simply an accusation of something he imagines to be be likely. That's a completely fair and valid statement. And who knows, maybe he DOES have evidence, maybe Israel WAS as elbow-deep in it as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the US were. he should have said so, if so, but the possibility exists.

But no, rather than make a reasonable point, you just start running around screaming "THE JOOZ! THE JOOOOOOZ!"

Still, I commend you for not falling into the common practice of graverobbing the Holocaust on your first salvo. It puts you at least that much above some other posters here.

[geek tragedy]

16. Yeah, all of those wacky Stormfront conspiracy theories blaming 'Zionists' and the "Mossad"

for every fucking thing that happens are totally not about Jews.

The idea that Israel is controlling Egypt's military is batshit insane. The most charitable explanation for Edrogan's comments is that he's a shameful, lying demagogue.

the alternative is that he's gone the way of Ahmadinejad.

[Scootaloo]

31. Except we're not talking about "wacky stormfront conspiracy theories"

I don't know if you've ever been on Stormfront. I have. Research purposes, you know? Believe me, what they come up with is way, way beyond anything Erdogan has said here. On Stormfront, Jews control Kentucky Fried Chicken and the secret herbs and spices are actually drugs and chemicals that incite blacks to violence against whites, as part of ZOG's master plan against the races of Europe.

What we have here is the leader of one nation accusing the government of a second nation of being involved in the politics of a third nation. This is not an off-the-wall thing, in fact it happens every fucking day, with pretty much every nation on earth. Some ARE more credible than others... but it just happens that accusing Israel of interfering in Egypt is quite credible, given Israel has done so before, both as antagonist and as partner.

Ignoring the reality of international politics, and the reality of the history of Israeli-Egyptian relations, you instead decide to use jews as human shields - essentially saying that anyone who launches a criticism of Israel only does so because JOOOOZ. That's shameful, exploitative, and flatly ignorant.

Now, I want you to understand. i'm not fist-bumping Erdogan here, I'm simply explaining to you that Israel and Jews are two different things, and that someone can speak against Israel, even ludicrously, without Jews being the centerpiece - or even involved. And if you want to talk about Stormfront, I will advise you - they can't tell the difference between Jews and Israel, either. Not lobbing the accusation that you fit into the crowd, as far as i can tell you don't... but still, just realize there's a difference between the two.

As pertains to Erdogan's accusation... he says he has proof:

"What do they say in Egypt? Democracy is not the ballot box. What is behind it? Israel. We have in our hands documentation," Erdogan said in comments broadcast by TRT state television.

Okay. I want to see it. He says "We have proof," he needs to present that proof for examination. Don't you think? I think we can agree on that, if you make an accusation you should back it up, ESPECIALLY if you say "I have the stuff to back it up." Am I right?

Now here's something. Reuters was able to contact Israel, the US, and Egypt for their responses. What it doesn't do is contact Turkey for a follow-through, it doesn't say "Mr. Erdogan, this is one of the world's biggest newswires, could you share this proof with us please?" I think this is odd, because... well...
- if Erdogan has good evidence to back his accusation, that's a story.
- if Erdogan has bad evidence backing his claim. that's a story
- if Erdogan refuses to release the evidence, that's a story
- If Erdogan says "I made it up," that's a story.
A column that says "Erdogan said this, then Egypt said that, and Israel responded with something and here's what the US says about the discussion" isn't a story, it's a gossip piece.

And a little blurb on media literacy? Notice how often the article reminds us that Erdogan's party is "Islamist." Notice too how it praises both Egypt's military junta and Turkey's former military rule. This article isn't journalism, but it's something, all right.

[geek tragedy]

33. To be honest, it's more plausible that the Mossad controls

KFC than it controls the largest military in the Arab world.

[Scootaloo]

36. Except Erdogan isn't saying "Mossad controls Egypt's military"

That's Another_Liberal, downthread. At least that's what he seems to be saying

He says Israel was involved. I'm not sure why you find this concept impossible.

Similar accusations have been leveled against the Saudis and Qatar, as well as the United States. Do you find these to also be "wacky stormfront conspiracy theories," Geek Tragedy? Are the people who point fingers at the Saudis and Qatar just nasty little trolls who hate the Gulf Arabs? Are they making Goebbels proud as well? Are the people pointing fingers at the US unreasonable white-hating (or black-hating, if you consider the president the face of our nation) motherfuckers?

[geek tragedy]

37. Because the Saudis funnel aid to Egypt

and are Arab Muslims.

The US has been blamed for being too pro-Morsi by the secularists in Egypt. Everyone's to blame but the Egyptians.

[Scootaloo]

38. Wow, really?

So you acknowledge that past interferences in Egyptian policy lends credibility to accusations of current interferences in Egyptian policy, but only if the nation so interfering is peopled by "Arab Muslims."

Well, thanks for putting this mentality on display outside of I/P, so the rest of DU can get a glimpse into the inner churnings of your head, I suppose.

[another_liberal]

2. Considering Netanyahu's track record . . .

It might well be true. Let's see the evidence, Mr. President. Don't be slow to show what you have, or you will get the worst of it.

[branford]

5. Track record of what - opposing violent Islamists?

Why exactly would Netanyahu back Morsi and the Hamas supporting Muslim Brotherhood?

Nevertheless, Israel said absolutely nothing while the Egyptian army long warned the MB that they would act, and conducted full diplomatic relations with Egypt during Morsi's rule.

You might have trouble believing this, but most of the troubles in the Middle East have nothing to do with Israel and the Jews . . .

[another_liberal]

7. His track record of . . .

I meant his track record of unprincipled intrigue and immoral, excessive violence. One might also add his track record of complete readiness to involve himself and his country in the internal affairs of literally all of Israel's neighbors.

As to the source of, "Most of the troubles of the Middle East," historians will get to debate that question for many decades to come; nevertheless, among the likely suspects will always be Israel and, of course, her primary enabler, The United State of America.

[geek tragedy]

6. What is Netanyahu's track record in governing Egypt? Silly. nt

[another_liberal]

9. Never heard of the Mossad?

Look them up. It's quite a read.

[geek tragedy]

11. So, the Mossad is in charge of Egypt's military now? Jeebus, listen to yourself, nt

[another_liberal]

25. I suspect you are being intentionally obtuse?

My guess is that you understand exactly what I meant.

[leftynyc]

43. You're right about that

Anyone reading your posts knows exactly what you mean.

[another_liberal]

44. Those who are blinded by bias . . .

The truth tends to anger those who are blinded by bias and sectarian self-interest.

[leftynyc]

45. Tell me about it

It's why so many already know what you think and what you'll readily believe with absolutely no proof whatsoever.

[another_liberal]

54. Bias is as bias does.

You understand the Middle East through a devotion to one regional power alone. I refuse to be that limited.

[jessie04]

4. What a sleazy pos.

When in doubt, go to old standby...blame the Jews.

Drop dead, Tayyip.

[another_liberal]

8. Let's see what the Trukish President's proof actually is.

Aren't you at least curious to know?

[geek tragedy]

14. He's making shit up, and I really pity anyone not able

to realize how absurd stating that Jews control the Egyptian military is.

[another_liberal]

27. Pity anyone you want.

I'm still eager to see what Erdogan's cards truly are.

[jessie04]

24. Notice he doesnt release this "proof" ?

He talks a good game but he's got nothing ...but hatred.

[another_liberal]

26. He may have to . . .

Having already said as much as he has.

[jessie04]

67. Still waiting for that amazing proof.

i'm going to kick this everyday.

[another_liberal]

69. Yes, by all means . . .

I think you should.

[jessie04]

70. If he never delivers, what will be your opinion then ?

You willing to call it what it is?

Rank anti-semitism ?

[another_liberal]

71. If President Erdagon never produces evidence to support his accusation?

In that case, I would conclude he should have kept his mouth shut about what he thought he knew but could not prove.

[jessie04]

72. And i'm STIILL waiting for that devastating proof.

day5

[jessie04]

73. Day 6

His devastating proof remains elusive.

[jessie04]

74. Day 7

Pres Erdagan still wont give up his proof. Frustrating.

[jessie04]

77. Day 8

still no proof. I am beginning to think he was lying.

[jessie04]

79. Day 10

and still no proof.

[jessie04]

82. Day 11.

hope of proof fading.

[Steviehh]

10. Hasbara trolls

I'm surprised at this reaction. US and Israel are interested in elections until the people elect Islamists. Note Hamas and now Egypt.

Two things: the Egyptian military didn't want to give up their control of most businesses. Privatizing their share of the economy is a no-no in Muslim countries (read Resources).

And Israel and US have declared war on Islam.

Unfortunately, religious beliefs have little to do with Egyptian revolution. It's all about power, and the Egyptian military won't give it to a government or the people.

[geek tragedy]

12. I predict the mossad will cause your account to be cancelled, because you have

challenged their authority.

[markpkessinger]

19. Don't be so sure..

Results of alert on this post (I was #6):


At Wed Aug 21, 2013, 12:09 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Hasbara trolls
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=570919

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Crazy talk, troll, Jew-baiter

"And Israel and US have declared war on Islam. "

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Aug 21, 2013, 12:16 AM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: It's opinion and I don't feel personally "baited". Sorry - free speech is sometimes a tough pill to swallow.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The poster is expressing a point-of-view, which one can agree or disagree with. But there is certainly a reasonable case to be made that the U.S. and Israel have indeed declared a de facto war on Islam. The post should stand.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[geek tragedy]

20. I've seen enough of this kind of troll to predict.

Admins get it right much moreso than juries do.

[jessie04]

22. So anytime you bait someone...

just say..." free speech is sometimes a tough pill to swallow."

thx J2

[another_liberal]

28. Cool!

Free speech is still alive on the Democratic Underground!

[leftynyc]

46. No matter how stupid,

insulting or ridiculous it is. Yipee!!!

[another_liberal]

48. I see none of those qualities in the posts in question.

But then, I'm not blinded by bias in favor of a particular regional power.

[leftynyc]

49. Of course you don't

It's everybody else that has a bias - not poor, misunderstood you. Poor thing.

[another_liberal]

51. OMG!

Now you've really crushed me. How can I possibly go on after that?

[leftynyc]

53. I couldn't possibly care less (n/t)

[another_liberal]

55. You don't comprehend sarcasm either?

I see.

[leftynyc]

56. Yawn

You aren't complicated in any sense of that word. Just the opposite. And now I'm bored with you. Maybe you'll have more luck trying to convince someone else what an unbiased deep thinker you are.

[another_liberal]

61. I'm just not as gullible as some . . .

Nor am I likely to be duped into supporting a gang of Fascists like the Egyptian coup leaders.

[leftynyc]

62. I hope it's not too painful to keep

patting yourself on the back like that. If you define support as me saying I would rather live under a military dictatorship than a theocratic dictatorship there is simply no hope for you. No hope at all. But it is good to keep it straight. You support the religious freaks...on a liberal board.

[another_liberal]

64. I support democracy . . .

I am not a partisan of any of the factions now at odds in Egypt. I will add, however, that to suggest one would like to live under a "military dictatorship" is about as far as one can go from the norms and mores of liberalism!

[leftynyc]

65. Bullshit

You're supporting a group of people who won an election and then proceeded to consolidate power and make it so there was never another election, cracked down on the press and on the opposition. They killed Coptics and you think they're a basket of puppies. That is not democracy. And if my choices are military or religious - I'd chose military every time as religious freaks are the scum of the earth.

[another_liberal]

68. Don't tell me what my opinions are.

I speak for myself. You can disagree with me, but you can not tell me what I meant.

[jessie04]

21. Quite a post.

Good to see you got it all figured out.

[markpkessinger]

23. I think the poster makes a fair point about U.S. hypocrisy concerning democratically elected ...

...governments. One need only take a look at U.S.'s role in the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Iran in 1953, installing, in its place, the U.S.'s hand-picked puppet, the Shah.

[another_liberal]

29. Don't forget . . .

Honduras in 2009.

[markpkessinger]

30. Indeed. n/t

[hrmjustin]

32. There is no war against Islam.

[Scootaloo]

40. You think so?

I suppose that depends on where you set your standards. if by "War on Islam" you picture a religious holy war for church and God, then no, there is no war on Islam.

if you take a look at US policies towards the Middle east, North Africa, and Southwestern Asia, however? We certainly seem to be making a lot of effort to destroy or subjugate lands peopled by Muslims, don't we? Maybe Islam is simply incidental, but I promise you, the people being fucked over by us don't see it that way.

Do you think the US is committed to peace, justice, and democracy in the Muslim world? Consider this.

Our greatest ally in the region is an openly theocratic / fascist monarchy that utilizes our extensive military aid explicitly to subjugate its own population (I'm talking about Saudi Arabia, if anyone's puzzled.) We support them. Full tilt. When they chop the heads off of people for being gay, we might mumble about it, but we still write the checks and send them the tanks and jets.

However, we are nearly rabid in our obsessive opposition to the Assad regime of Syria - a secular and fascist regime - as well as to the government of Iran, a theocratic democracy (yeah, that does sound weird, but it's how they roll.) We are so opposed to these nations, that we supplied Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons, knowing fully well he would use them against civilian populations in Iran. We are right now fueling the insurgency in Syria which, if successful WILL plunge Syria into the sort of violent chaos we see in Somalia or Afghanistan. That's how much we hate these regimes.

But wait, isn't a secular fascism at least a little better than a theocratic one, by American standards? Wouldn't a theocratic democracy, by the same token, be at least a little better than a theocratic monarchy? If we're going to go with the lesser of two (or three?) evils, then shouldn't it be Saudi Arabia that gets left high and dry? it's certainly a more brutal regime than either Syria or Iran (which yes, is saying quite a lot)

Here's the thing... Saudi Arabia does what the US says. They're compliant. We utilize their money and influence to manipulate other state in the region, and so we pat their little bungee-corded heads and accept the brutal totalitaninism of their regime. Iran and Syria are independent of the US - Iran is truly independent, while Syria is under the Russian sphere. They don't follow our demands, they don't pay us tribute, and so we endeavor to punish or destroy them. Just as we have destroyed two other nations that became noncompliant - that also happen to be Muslim nations. Hell, we effectively destroyed Iran once already with our overthrow of its democracy and the installation of a brutal, bloodthirsty dictator.

We also oppose movements for democracy in the region. We opposed every single motion of the Arab Spring, after the surprise in Tunisia. We opposed the overthrow of Mubarak, we helped suppress the Arab spring in Bahrain, we poo-pooed movements in Libya, in Algeria, in Morocco, in Jordan, in Lebanon, and in Syria. We later came back to Libya and Syria once thigns started getting violent, and decided to throw guns and money into the mix... Which is as bold an endorsement of violence over peaceful resolution as anything i can imagine. Why? because we liked these dictatorships. we were happy with Mubarak, and while we didn't care much for Ghadaffi and Assad, they were known factors we were cozy with all the same. The idea of the fellahin ("dirty peasants&quot staging democratic revolutions was something the united states could not, would not, and did not tolerate.

We are on a crusade, hrmjustin. it's not in the name of Jesus, but the people in the crosshairs share the same religion that was targeted back then. Our crusade is to force the peoples of the middle east and North Africa into subjugation to the US, or into destitution and anarchy. It's about securing resources (primarily oil) for ourselves, while denying those resources to other players in the world - and exterminating local opposition to these twinned goals.

[hrmjustin]

41. Well written post and I agree that our foreign policy is a mess and is hypocritical.

I think it has to do with oil, money and perceived American interest by our leaders over decades.

We need to examine our policies.

[John2]

57. I see a huge

flaw in your Post. Our biggest Ally in the Region is Israel not Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is merely a puppet on a string, while Israel can do anything they want. They forbid others becoming citizens, only by quotas. Their country is based on race. Do you deny this, or was it just a mistake on your part to leave it out? Our crusade among religious groups in the U.S. is also to protect the Holy Land including God's chosen people. That includes making Jerusalem the capital of Israel. We have our religious fanatics too.

[Scootaloo]

58. I simply didn't want to bother discussing Israel; I get enough of that in I/P

Saudi Arabia's theocratic dictatorship also serves as a clearer example of what I'm getting at. As for our relation to the two, I think they're about equal in terms of how we regard them as "allies" - they're both valued client states, it's just that they serve different purposes in the US policy in the region. Israel is the stick, Saudi Arabia is the carrot. See how they work in tandem in Syria right now, with Saudi writing the checks for the insurgents and Israel chucking missiles and ground troops every now and then.

[bemildred]

15. Boy, you just don't know what side anybody is on anymore. nt

[Harmony Blue]

34. It is a dynamic situation

Turkey has a major problem with securing their border with Syria due to the ongoing civil war. Then, there is an issue of the Turkish Kurds that are coordinating with Syrian, Iranian, and Iraqi Kurds. The Iraqi Kurds have decided to forge an unholy alliance with the Iraqi government after AQ viciously attacked them recently to counter this resurgent threat. Turkey is probably frustrated they can't do more to slow down the Kurdish movement but they realize that AQ is a legit threat. So, they turn a blind eye towards the Kurdish movement for now especially since iraqi government is coordinating with them now...

Turkish military history is very secular like Egyptian military history but only recently has Turkey experienced religion influence their political landscape. Thus, based on this shift Erdogan is basing his position on the shifting political winds. However, the danger is that he may sow distrust with a Turkish military that is very secular.

[bemildred]

35. All true enough, I was talking more about old alliances & friendships which now lie in ruins.

And new, expedient ones jelling as we watch. You mention several.

[Alamuti Lotus]

47. Indeed... Syria had united the Zionists, Turkey, and the Gulf dictators; now divided on Egypt!

the Zionists and the Gulf dictators (minus Qatar) remain in solid agreement with their support of the fascist military clique, now Erdogan breaks ranks. I would ordinarily assume that disagreement on this matter would not be too big of a deal in the context of other things going on, but Erdogan's statement is a pretty serious broadside. The fact that it empirically appears to be true makes it all the more surprising that it is said at all.

I do wonder where Qatar is going to fall on this matter now; the Ikhwan's victory in Egypt was the old Qatari regime's pet project, and its overthrow by the military was a means of KSA "putting them in their place" (amongst other side benefits). The new, young emir has since kept very quiet and apparently has meekly learned the lesson that his father never did--opposing the Wahhabi-Zionist programme is futile. But with Turkey coming out against the fascist gang and its foreign plotters, will the more traditional Saudi-Qatari rivalry rekindle?

[bemildred]

59. Well, you know better than I, but yeah.

I can see similar issues on the "western" side, frenemies all over, and it is difficult to tell which ways some of them are going to go in the future, and all in the context of a USA hamstrung by it's own incompetence, over-reaching and this unfortunate Snowden business.

I think Erdogan has pretty well beshit himself in public at this point, which is a shame, the ego gets them every time. Him and Morsi look much alike in the over-reaching.

Nasrallah seems to still have the fire in his belly, and seems to understand this is an existential crisis, agree with your assessment.

And the Kurds, sitting on that oil, smack in the middle, are not going to just sit there and take it for anybody.

Syria is looking more and more like a lit fuse, but then it always did.

[oberliner]

75. "The Zionists" ?

Can't even bring yourself to write Israel?

[Alamuti Lotus]

76. That's all you took from my post?

To answer your question: "Israel" has a very specific connotation that I did not intend to utilize in that particular writing. I used precisely the phrase that I intended for the context of the remark.

For example. You are a Zionist (in this case that is not a criticism, nor is there any secret inferences being made there that need to be uncovered--only an obvious statement), but not an Israeli, and I intended to reference the opinions of people like yourself in what I was saying. And no, I was not thinking about you personally, but it fits. The present events in Syria has certainly united the Turkish state, the Gulf dictators, and Zionists (some in Israel, some in Fiji, some on the moon, some in the US), to an even greater degree than they were already. However, many of these same people are now divided on Egypt. Example ended. To substitute the world "Israel" or "Israeli" in that sentence would have delivered a different meaning than what I had intended, so it was not used. Though it is interesting that you think the words are just interchangeable; I should be criticized if I made such a sloppy, blanket generalization.

This was fun. However, in the future I will not waste my time playing into the silly word games that emanate from the peanut gallery. I don't believe that you give the slightest damn about the intricate and complex details of the things I say (I may be proven wrong, but I doubt it), and my interest in debate (if that's even what these can be called) dwindles daily.

[oberliner]

78. I appreciate your response

Except for the last paragraph which undercut the thoughtfulness of the rest of it.

[David__77]

17. With any luck, Erdogan would go next.

These ultra-right political forces are a danger to world peace.

[geek tragedy]

18. Unfortunately, Edrogan represents majority sentiment in Turkey.

How long they remain in NATO is an open question at this rate. The candidacy for belonging to the EU is obviously dead at this point.

[joshcryer]

50. There were massive protests in June but he cracked down hard.

He has experience with that.

[Catherina]

81. +1000 n/t

[William769]

39. The White House should not have been so nice in the words they chose to use.

Turkey, it is what it is.

[jessie04]

42. True

they should have told him to FOff.

[Democracyinkind]

52. It does make sense for him to say that. He's bathing in the same tub as Morsi.

Hot waters in that tub.

[jessie04]

60. Still waiting for that "double secret proof"

im going to kick this until he deliuvers.

[leftynyc]

63. +1000

I want to see that proof also. Let's see if his supporters on this thread have any answers or will continue to swallow whatever he spews (as long as it attacks Israel).

[Catherina]

80. The coalition we're counting on seems to be unraveling fast.

This whole thing is a bad powder keg.

Russia's Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin tweeted this yesterday

Dmitry Rogozin ‏@Rogozin 22h

Life Запад обращается с исламским миром как обезьяна с гранатой

"The West handles the Islamic world the way a monkey handles a grenade"

We need to stand down, step back quickly. A coalition under these conditions is madness.