Degree of "Freedom" in civil societies is measured by the extent with which its citizens follow the prevailing laws in that country. A democratic society is no exception, except in democracies, people - when they are in sufficient numbers - can change the prevailing laws. Even personal freedoms of one citizen ends where the freedom of the next one starts.

Idiots who believe that freedom is the right to be able to do whatever their own little minds dictate will therefore be stopped when their actions may endanger rights of others or laws of the state, for state has a right to protect itself from "insurgents" as well. The alternative would have been a complete chaos, where every citizen would have to trust his own sword to protect or enforce his own principles onto others.

A civil society can only exist among citizens willing to submit to the laws of that society, limiting possible personal differences between its members to levels where none feels his/her life or way of life is threathened.

In democracies, the laws - made by majority votes, also checked by the juidicial system - determines the rules of the game; law makers however should listen to minority voices too and ensure their ways of life are not threathened only because they are lesser in numbers. This tolerance to minorities however, can not allow them to make their own rules, against the better jugement of the majority. Allowing them a part of the country´s land so they can try their own sovereignity is one of such exceptions.

What happens if minorities are so adamant that they wish to impress their own wishes on the majority? Well, if they are smart enough there are democtratic ways to change the governing rules; if they believe they are too strong to bother with any democratic stuggles,  there are undemocratic avenues to explore too. One thing to remember here however, is the democracies have the right to protect themselves too and the laws can no longer be expected protect the rebelling dissidents.

Another - but less honorable - way open to the dissidents is to become a pain in the but of the society, like certain idiots here, and while reaping the benefits of the society, display their ill feelings and intentions at every oportunity, always pretending to be a part of the state they are cursing.

Good luck to them as well ! 

That´s the thing, Alpha. The protesters did not threaten anybody´s life, did they? Why shouldn´t they be allowed to speak their mind? If they don´t respect the blood evil Brits spilt for the the country they chose to live in, so be it. Respect cannot be enfoced. As long as they abide by the law they´re free to express their dismay for the hand that feeds them. If they don´t consider it hypocrisy to benefit from the money made on war and be against the war, so be it. What they cannot do is to harm people who think otherwise. That´s the extent of freedom. You´re free to agree with them, to disagree or to find them ridiculous.

I wonder if the east is such a wonderful place to live, or, it used to be such a wonderful, modern area before the evil westerners brought havoc there, why is it that refugees prefer moving to the UK and US instead choosing other wonderful places like SA or UAE?

I think I mentioned before..

We Turks have our own ways; our own definitions.

With one side of our face, we insist that we are a democratic country, a democratic society, Ataturk has given us the democracy years ago etc.. But with the other side, we start talking about how freedom of speech can be suppressed (with laws, banning web sites, jailing people etc) because we are trying to protect Ataturk (or something similar like protecting Turkishness etc) or our society is not ready etc..
The excuse is always there "Our society is not ready for freedom so these laws are necessary!!!".

As if to say "Our people are so primitive they don´t deserve a proper democracy"!!!

Other countries are slightly different..People don´t discuss the necessity of ´freedom of speech´ anymore..You can not find anybody in the west, who will try to persuade you "banning the web sites and jailing people because of protection of their national hero is compatible with the democracy or does not violate the right to have freedom of speech"...When you remind them ´NO it is not. Stop embaressing your country´, they will go and try to explain what they think the democracy is!!!

They are the main obsticles in Turkey to become a more modern society which once, Ataturk   dreamed of.. Ataturk would slap those people on the face after each meal three times a day,  if he had been alive..

You do not need to start your every sentence with "We Turks...", we Turks have a way of knowing each other without such bulshit, and we can tell what you are.

There are other countries ahead of us in democracy. Yes!

But some of those countries have not yet been tried by malicious dissidents, like Turkia suffers, yet.

Time will show how they will react when their dissidents also grow out of street demonstrations into terorism or guerilla wars directed from other countries.

Turkia wants her own terorists on her own mountains; by God, she shall handle them as necessary....spoiled minorities never win by force.

The sources of the world are flowing to the Western countries for about 400-450 years due to their colonial and wild policies. Westerners even exploit the human capital of the countries they go! Brain drain is the most visible exaple of that policy.

So, you will first create a chaos to declare a war, than kill the resisters, than exploit the natural sources, than use the people as cheap labor force, and finally you will scoop up the telented ones of that countrry. And after all those you will cry of migration! We f.cked your country up, but the ones who we don´t want can not come to my country! Thats absolutely disgusting! If the exploited countries citizens think that they have theier shares on the wellness of the west, they wont be so unfair.

What remained for these exploited countries? You destroyed every oportunities for these countries socio economical development. What do these people supposed to do after all? Every people tend to live comfortable. They are obliged to migrate to the countries which destroyed their confort. These people experience a conscientously dilemma. Thats why, i don´t expect cohesional actions from those people. The west created their enemies themselves. And actually, i dont think, that situation will be fixed, even it will get worse. West will reap just what they saw.

I dont see sensibility in western people to tese exploited people! They rather blame migrants for their worsening lifes and they totally miss the main points. Thats why nationalism is increasing in the West. That situation will harm the world very badly in the very close future. I hope a miracle happens but really i dont think so!

True, Kosovar thieves got a piece of Serbia by means of democratic vote

Yeah yeah we know, the west is evil and east is peace and love. If I´m not mistaken all great civilisations got big thanks to expansion. The smart ones won, the less fortunate were abused. It could have been the other way around if the east won.

Brain drain is one thing. Many people choose west because their native countries would never be able to provide them with equal opportunities. If you were unfortunate to be born in a backward country and you have a potential, nobody has to pay you to go to a better place, you´ll do everything you can to have a better life. However, the immigration is not only the skilled force, it is also the unskilled labour, people who do not want to assimilate and want to introduce their barbaric laws to the country they go to. That´s why I repeat my question, why immigrating west if there are rich eastern countries like Saudi or UAE? Could it be that west gives them more freedom? Or maybe they´re not so welcome by their Muslim brothers after all?

And I don´t think the problem is not wanting immigration. Were it so, it would have been banned years ago. It is the people who want to live in your house but keep the laws which are unacceptable. Nationalism is not only against poor Muslims, do you think central and eastern Europeans are valued better by nationalists? If you do then you couldn´t be more wrong. And the fun fact is eastern and central Europe have not really been subject to British expansion.

There´s a great Irish comedian, Tommy Tiernan, who characterised the Brits as people who go around the world invading different countries but get angry when these people follow them home

So, I´ll take your answer just like I take Tommy´s: with a pinch of salt

There was some slack about Western soldiers and Iraq, so I want to share a thought of mine on that You know what, I agree that the invasion of Iraq was badly planned, and had bad effects... HOWEVER (I know I will get slack for this, but I don´t care), are we forgetting that a-hole Sadam was in power there? Are we forgetting what he did in that country? I know we like to say it was all about oil, but I have the images of gassed Kurdish villages imprinted in my brain forever. Somebody had to kick Sadam out. The way in which it happened was horrible, and it shouldn´t have happened in this way AT ALL. But I get this idea that people are painting a picture of a perfect Iraq, where everybody was living in the land of milk and honey with great wealth and freedom. They were all soooo happy untilllll...the evil Westerners came! No, it wasn´t like that at all. The problem is that an army with under-trained young people, with no clear long term tactical plans was sent in, under false pretances (the famous Powell point), at the wrong point in time. The problem has nothing to do with them coming from the West, or with Iraq being the best country in the world pre-invasion time.

TODAY IS REMEMBERENCE SUNDAY, FOR ME IT IS NOT JUST ABOUT REMEMBERING THE SOLDIERS WHO DIED IN WARS, BUT  ANYONE WHO LOST THEIR LIVES NO MATTER WHAT THEIR NATIONALITY, COLOUR,RELIGION,AGE,SEX,OR SEXUALITY.

R.I.P

BAD NEWS

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-middle-east-11751888

Great, and Canada was supposed to remove their troops from Afganistan in 2011 but because of pessure from NATO they have to stay until 2014.  Canada wasn´t even involved in the invasion of Afganistan but got involved because of NATO request.  Now Britain says Al-Qeda cannot be defeated but only contained...  And they wonder why there are so many apposed to the actions in Afganistan

 It´s also about remembering the mothers, wives, children of those killed in all wars, military and civilians alike. Those who are left bear the real sacrifice.