Tweet
THERE CANNOT BE AN INDEPENDENT KURDISTAN
Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis
American Chronicle, CA
May 10 2007
Over the past two years, a greater publicity about the Kurds has
taken place; more recently maps have been circulated from media to
websites that portray the future boundaries of the 'long expected'
Kurdish state. Many describe the 'need' for an independent Kurdistan,
stating that in the 'volatile' Middle East, an independent Kurdistan
will be a pole for secular and democratic Muslims who will form a
break wave against Islamic fanaticism.
When the criminal supporters of this fantasy fall short of
'historical arguments', they transfigure themselves to oppressed
peoples' advocates: like all the other peoples, Kurds 'must' have a
national home! This is the supreme stage of their fallacy! In fact,
there cannot be a Kurdistan, because simply there are no 'Kurds'.
Kurds are not one people.
To start with basics, Kurds are not one people, they do not speak one
single language, they do not write their languages by means of one
writing system only, they do not believe in one and the same religion,
they have no common culture and lifestyle, and they have very varied
perspectives and targets.
Gathering under one roof all the populations that the Western centers
of colonial conspiracy intend to include within the borders of a coffin
(do not call it 'country' if you please) will be lethal to most of
these peoples, and in addition detrimental to the security of other
ethnic groups that will form the various 'minorities' of that place
- if we consider all the different peoples that are called 'Kurds'
as one ethnic group, and therefore the rising local 'majority'.
Little Academic Knowledge about the 'Kurds'
Of course, no one would consider the academic knowledge about one
people / nation as a prerogative to achieve independence and national
statehood. However, at this point is revealed the fallacy of the
secretive Western groups of power that intend to materialize this plan;
they mendaciously present all these peoples as one: the 'Kurds'!
Quite contrarily to their assumptions, onsite reality is strikingly
different from the Western labs where the falsehood of the 'one Kurdish
people' is being fabricated. These various peoples - erroneously called
at the international level 'Kurds' - are not just one people, but many;
they have different origins that cannot be retraced easily. How could
we put them together just for the needs of the next explosion in the
Middle East?
Kurdish languages and ethnic groups
Kurds speak three main languages and at least twenty additional
dialects. In Turkey, the main 'Kurdish' language is Kurmandja,
but other 'Kurds' speak Zaza (also called Dimli), Botani, Marashi,
Hekari, Ashiti, Shemdinani, and other dialects.
In Iraq, the main 'Kurdish' language is Sorani (centered around
Suleymaniyah), but people speak also Kurmandja (called Bahdinani here),
Hawleri, Mokri (very important for Literature), Hewrami, Gurani,
Rawanduzi, Kirkuki, Garmiyani, and other less commonly used dialects.
In Iran, 'Kurds' speak Sorani, Kermanshahi, Sandjabi, Gurani,
Pahlawani, Kalhori, Kordali, and other less commonly used dialects.
Not only the differences between two of these languages and dialects
can be very great, and as the number of the languages is big,
bilingualism is not common, and cannot be a remedy.
Centrifugal bilingualism
In addition, because of the political situation and the prevailing
national language, all these various 'Kurds' of Turkey, Iran, Iraq
and Syria have been characterized by a type of bilingualism whereby
the second language is per case Turkish, Farsi or Arabic.
This phenomenon is due to the imposition of exclusively one national
language in all these countries that, despite their different
politico-socio-economic conditions, adopted varied versions of
nationalism.
Origin
There are two prevailing theories about the origins of all these
peoples that are called Kurds in a recapitulative way. The problem
is precisely that, if we take some of these "Kurdish" languages as
reference point for a linguistic - historical evaluation, we are
led to different hypothesis than in the case we select some other
"Kurdish" languages for starting point.
In one case, we retrace Kurdish as Indo-European language, close to
the group of the Iranian languages. However, examining Kurmandja and
Zaza, we are inclined to consider Kurdish as closer linked to the
Caucasian languages, like Georgian.
All this involves a lot of biases, as Kurdology is a very new branch
of Orientalism with insignificant past (less than three decades),
and political interest and involvement has been easily discernible in
most of the cases, such as the Mitterrand patronized Institut Kude de
Paris. Certainly, academic interest about the Kurds has been expressed
in numerous volumes and articles over the past 100 years but it was
not systematized into a discipline before the early 1980s.
With the Kurds being at the mercy of Russian, French, English,
German and more recently American agents, linguistic elements and
historical data have been restructured according to politically
motivated targets, and even worse, the diversity of the sources,
namely the tremendously varied 'Kurdish" languages and dialects,
helped greatly these academic maneuvering.
Historical names and Historical reconstruction
Every nationalism tries to retrace a millennia long history, seeking
for similar names in the Dawn of the Civilization. Historical names
of peoples are a vast subject of historical analysis, and we know
very well that the same name has been many times attributed to
another people for numerous different reasons. The Medieval Greek
historiographers named the first Turkic peoples who appeared in the
East of today's Turkey 'Scythians'. But can we afford today to make
similar confusions?
When millennia long intervals separate two names of peoples that look
similar but are devoid of any other historical reference, source,
epigraphic evidence and the like, the two names are most probably
totally unrelated. All this is to firmly denounce the academically
irrelevant and absolutely inconsistent references to Ancient History
of the Kurds that can be found in partial articles like those of
wikipedia.
Kurds have no relations with the Guti of Middle Zagros mountains,
and there cannot be Kurdish past that antedates the 7th BCE and
the Assyrian references to Zikurtu a small people of the Iranian
plateau, at the easternmost confines of the Assyrian empire of those
days. Can we establish a relation between the Zikurtu of the Assyrian
- Babylonian texts, the Asagartiya of the Achaemenid Old Persian
inscriptions, and the Kardouhoi of the Ancient Greek references?
Possibly, but with great difficulty and a lot of reserve. Nothing
antedating those dates can be plausibly related to the past of some
of the peoples that presently are named 'Kurds'.
Neither does this imply that all the 'variants' of the Kurdish
constellations can be considered as descendants of the Zikurtu -
Asagartiya - Kardouhoi. The most plausible interpretation is that
some of those who are called 'Kurds' today may descend from various
peoples of the Antiquity, involving the aforementioned and several
other peoples.
How 'Kurds' write their different languages?
Unique case in the History of the Mankind, the 'Kurdish' constellations
write different of the aforementioned languages and dialects in three
different writing systems. 'Kurds' in Turkey write their languages
in Latin characters, imitating therefore the Turks.
'Kurds' in Syria, Iraq and Iran write their different languages in
Arabic / Farsi writing, with some additional signs.
'Kurds' in countries of the late USSR, mainly Armenia, Azerbaijan,
and Georgia write their languages in Cyrillic alphabet, as result
of the forced russification that was tyrannically implemented during
the Soviet years.
Adding to the linguistic, the scriptural division gives a dead end
to any dream of pacific Kurdish unification under one state - umbrella.
Different Kurdish Religions
The different peoples that collectively are called 'Kurds' believe in
various religious systems; in their majority they are Sunni Muslims,
but there are many Shia 'Kurds' in Turkey, in Iraq and in Iran.
Automatically, it is understood that the linguistic boundaries
among those called 'Kurds' are not the same as the religious groups'
demarcation lines. There are usually Sunni and Shia among the 'Kurds'
who speak the same language.
In addition, there are Yazidis, who form a separate religious group,
whom the Muslims almost consider as Satanists.
There are 'Kurds' who are Bahais, and there are 'Kurds' who are
Ahl-e Haq.
Some of these groups' religious theological - philosophical differences
represent a gap greater than the one existing between Islam and
Hinduism or Christianity and Buddhism.
Independent Kurdistan: the Last Act of Western Immorality and Suicide
That is why it would be extremely useful that anyone listening to
theories about the 'right' and / or the 'necessity' of a unified
Kurdistan, formed out of the detachment of parts of the territories
of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran, instead of thoughtlessly and easily
accepting that criminal colonial propaganda, which for a moment looks
pro-Kurdish, asks the following questions:
- Who will say what the official language of this so-called Kurdistan
will be?
- Who will specify the official writing system of the language accepted
as official in 'Kurdistan'?
- Who will decide about the official religion of the impossible to
form country?
- Who will prevent one 'Kurd' from killing another in the effort to
impose one language over another, one writing system over another,
or one religion over another?
- Or because such a state may be necessary for the criminal interests
of an apostate Freemasonic lodge, the 'Kurds' should be killing
mercilessly one another for the next decades?
- Who will prevent the Genocide of the Aramaeans at the hands of Kurds?
- Why those who 'envisage' a huge and impossible Kurdistan do not
offer any place for freedom and democracy for the Christian Aramaeans
of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran?
- Who will prevent the wars between this bogus-Kurdistan country and
all its neighbors?
All this does not signify that all these peoples are not oppressed,
and their condition should remain the same as now. A great improvement
is needed indeed; but it must be improvement, not a fallacious
improvement-looking deterioration.
What to do for all these oppressed peoples of the Middle East will
therefore be the subject of another article.
Note:
In the picture we have one of the vicious maps that shamelessly
circulate during the past few months in order to prepare the global
public opinion for another deception of apostate Free Masonic
inspiration.
http://www.americanchronicle .com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=26681
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis
American Chronicle, CA
May 10 2007
Over the past two years, a greater publicity about the Kurds has
taken place; more recently maps have been circulated from media to
websites that portray the future boundaries of the 'long expected'
Kurdish state. Many describe the 'need' for an independent Kurdistan,
stating that in the 'volatile' Middle East, an independent Kurdistan
will be a pole for secular and democratic Muslims who will form a
break wave against Islamic fanaticism.
When the criminal supporters of this fantasy fall short of
'historical arguments', they transfigure themselves to oppressed
peoples' advocates: like all the other peoples, Kurds 'must' have a
national home! This is the supreme stage of their fallacy! In fact,
there cannot be a Kurdistan, because simply there are no 'Kurds'.
Kurds are not one people.
To start with basics, Kurds are not one people, they do not speak one
single language, they do not write their languages by means of one
writing system only, they do not believe in one and the same religion,
they have no common culture and lifestyle, and they have very varied
perspectives and targets.
Gathering under one roof all the populations that the Western centers
of colonial conspiracy intend to include within the borders of a coffin
(do not call it 'country' if you please) will be lethal to most of
these peoples, and in addition detrimental to the security of other
ethnic groups that will form the various 'minorities' of that place
- if we consider all the different peoples that are called 'Kurds'
as one ethnic group, and therefore the rising local 'majority'.
Little Academic Knowledge about the 'Kurds'
Of course, no one would consider the academic knowledge about one
people / nation as a prerogative to achieve independence and national
statehood. However, at this point is revealed the fallacy of the
secretive Western groups of power that intend to materialize this plan;
they mendaciously present all these peoples as one: the 'Kurds'!
Quite contrarily to their assumptions, onsite reality is strikingly
different from the Western labs where the falsehood of the 'one Kurdish
people' is being fabricated. These various peoples - erroneously called
at the international level 'Kurds' - are not just one people, but many;
they have different origins that cannot be retraced easily. How could
we put them together just for the needs of the next explosion in the
Middle East?
Kurdish languages and ethnic groups
Kurds speak three main languages and at least twenty additional
dialects. In Turkey, the main 'Kurdish' language is Kurmandja,
but other 'Kurds' speak Zaza (also called Dimli), Botani, Marashi,
Hekari, Ashiti, Shemdinani, and other dialects.
In Iraq, the main 'Kurdish' language is Sorani (centered around
Suleymaniyah), but people speak also Kurmandja (called Bahdinani here),
Hawleri, Mokri (very important for Literature), Hewrami, Gurani,
Rawanduzi, Kirkuki, Garmiyani, and other less commonly used dialects.
In Iran, 'Kurds' speak Sorani, Kermanshahi, Sandjabi, Gurani,
Pahlawani, Kalhori, Kordali, and other less commonly used dialects.
Not only the differences between two of these languages and dialects
can be very great, and as the number of the languages is big,
bilingualism is not common, and cannot be a remedy.
Centrifugal bilingualism
In addition, because of the political situation and the prevailing
national language, all these various 'Kurds' of Turkey, Iran, Iraq
and Syria have been characterized by a type of bilingualism whereby
the second language is per case Turkish, Farsi or Arabic.
This phenomenon is due to the imposition of exclusively one national
language in all these countries that, despite their different
politico-socio-economic conditions, adopted varied versions of
nationalism.
Origin
There are two prevailing theories about the origins of all these
peoples that are called Kurds in a recapitulative way. The problem
is precisely that, if we take some of these "Kurdish" languages as
reference point for a linguistic - historical evaluation, we are
led to different hypothesis than in the case we select some other
"Kurdish" languages for starting point.
In one case, we retrace Kurdish as Indo-European language, close to
the group of the Iranian languages. However, examining Kurmandja and
Zaza, we are inclined to consider Kurdish as closer linked to the
Caucasian languages, like Georgian.
All this involves a lot of biases, as Kurdology is a very new branch
of Orientalism with insignificant past (less than three decades),
and political interest and involvement has been easily discernible in
most of the cases, such as the Mitterrand patronized Institut Kude de
Paris. Certainly, academic interest about the Kurds has been expressed
in numerous volumes and articles over the past 100 years but it was
not systematized into a discipline before the early 1980s.
With the Kurds being at the mercy of Russian, French, English,
German and more recently American agents, linguistic elements and
historical data have been restructured according to politically
motivated targets, and even worse, the diversity of the sources,
namely the tremendously varied 'Kurdish" languages and dialects,
helped greatly these academic maneuvering.
Historical names and Historical reconstruction
Every nationalism tries to retrace a millennia long history, seeking
for similar names in the Dawn of the Civilization. Historical names
of peoples are a vast subject of historical analysis, and we know
very well that the same name has been many times attributed to
another people for numerous different reasons. The Medieval Greek
historiographers named the first Turkic peoples who appeared in the
East of today's Turkey 'Scythians'. But can we afford today to make
similar confusions?
When millennia long intervals separate two names of peoples that look
similar but are devoid of any other historical reference, source,
epigraphic evidence and the like, the two names are most probably
totally unrelated. All this is to firmly denounce the academically
irrelevant and absolutely inconsistent references to Ancient History
of the Kurds that can be found in partial articles like those of
wikipedia.
Kurds have no relations with the Guti of Middle Zagros mountains,
and there cannot be Kurdish past that antedates the 7th BCE and
the Assyrian references to Zikurtu a small people of the Iranian
plateau, at the easternmost confines of the Assyrian empire of those
days. Can we establish a relation between the Zikurtu of the Assyrian
- Babylonian texts, the Asagartiya of the Achaemenid Old Persian
inscriptions, and the Kardouhoi of the Ancient Greek references?
Possibly, but with great difficulty and a lot of reserve. Nothing
antedating those dates can be plausibly related to the past of some
of the peoples that presently are named 'Kurds'.
Neither does this imply that all the 'variants' of the Kurdish
constellations can be considered as descendants of the Zikurtu -
Asagartiya - Kardouhoi. The most plausible interpretation is that
some of those who are called 'Kurds' today may descend from various
peoples of the Antiquity, involving the aforementioned and several
other peoples.
How 'Kurds' write their different languages?
Unique case in the History of the Mankind, the 'Kurdish' constellations
write different of the aforementioned languages and dialects in three
different writing systems. 'Kurds' in Turkey write their languages
in Latin characters, imitating therefore the Turks.
'Kurds' in Syria, Iraq and Iran write their different languages in
Arabic / Farsi writing, with some additional signs.
'Kurds' in countries of the late USSR, mainly Armenia, Azerbaijan,
and Georgia write their languages in Cyrillic alphabet, as result
of the forced russification that was tyrannically implemented during
the Soviet years.
Adding to the linguistic, the scriptural division gives a dead end
to any dream of pacific Kurdish unification under one state - umbrella.
Different Kurdish Religions
The different peoples that collectively are called 'Kurds' believe in
various religious systems; in their majority they are Sunni Muslims,
but there are many Shia 'Kurds' in Turkey, in Iraq and in Iran.
Automatically, it is understood that the linguistic boundaries
among those called 'Kurds' are not the same as the religious groups'
demarcation lines. There are usually Sunni and Shia among the 'Kurds'
who speak the same language.
In addition, there are Yazidis, who form a separate religious group,
whom the Muslims almost consider as Satanists.
There are 'Kurds' who are Bahais, and there are 'Kurds' who are
Ahl-e Haq.
Some of these groups' religious theological - philosophical differences
represent a gap greater than the one existing between Islam and
Hinduism or Christianity and Buddhism.
Independent Kurdistan: the Last Act of Western Immorality and Suicide
That is why it would be extremely useful that anyone listening to
theories about the 'right' and / or the 'necessity' of a unified
Kurdistan, formed out of the detachment of parts of the territories
of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran, instead of thoughtlessly and easily
accepting that criminal colonial propaganda, which for a moment looks
pro-Kurdish, asks the following questions:
- Who will say what the official language of this so-called Kurdistan
will be?
- Who will specify the official writing system of the language accepted
as official in 'Kurdistan'?
- Who will decide about the official religion of the impossible to
form country?
- Who will prevent one 'Kurd' from killing another in the effort to
impose one language over another, one writing system over another,
or one religion over another?
- Or because such a state may be necessary for the criminal interests
of an apostate Freemasonic lodge, the 'Kurds' should be killing
mercilessly one another for the next decades?
- Who will prevent the Genocide of the Aramaeans at the hands of Kurds?
- Why those who 'envisage' a huge and impossible Kurdistan do not
offer any place for freedom and democracy for the Christian Aramaeans
of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran?
- Who will prevent the wars between this bogus-Kurdistan country and
all its neighbors?
All this does not signify that all these peoples are not oppressed,
and their condition should remain the same as now. A great improvement
is needed indeed; but it must be improvement, not a fallacious
improvement-looking deterioration.
What to do for all these oppressed peoples of the Middle East will
therefore be the subject of another article.
Note:
In the picture we have one of the vicious maps that shamelessly
circulate during the past few months in order to prepare the global
public opinion for another deception of apostate Free Masonic
inspiration.
http://www.americanchronicle .com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=26681
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress