Catwoman, in a previous post I made references to the xenophobic nature of European culture. I believe if this referandum was made in any other European country (maybe except for Britain) the result would be more or less the same.

You usually take matters like this: they made a mistake and you also made a mistake therefore you have no right to criticize others. This is not a constructive approach. We must pay utmost care to maintain the focus on the problem at hand.

The decision of the Swiss people though predictable is a bid for a blatant violation of basic human rights. It is despicable, unacceptable, seperatist and it is a huge backward step taken by ignorant and narrow minds. Let us protest this without mixing it with other subjects.

As far as I can remember and this does not necessarily have to apply to the present time; if a boy is not willing to introduce a girl to his family, he is probably not considering the relationship very seriously.

This world is composed of Alamedas, Vineyards, Aenigmas and AlfaF´s. I would be happy if I can contribute to them in any way I can. The beauty of the world lies in its diversity...

Rather than quoting your text I will try to list my opinions as concisely as possible:

* If an opinion has a popular appeal, it is a strong opinion and it has coercion.

* I am not defending the correctness of any decision taken in the way explained in my text.

* Ghandhi was surely an exception.

* I also believe African American have made a profound impact on the American civilization.

Two of my favourite musicians (Monk and Miles Davis) are Afro-American. American athletism scene is dominated by African Americans and finally your president is an African American. African American people have very good cultural assets but to my knowledge they are not  offered equal economic opportunities. An Afro American icon Louis Armstron would probably die in misery did he not have that stunning skill as a musician. How many great musicians does the Afro-American community have? How many of them will end up as Mohammad Ali or Michael Jordan. In this competition, you need coercion, like that offered by Obama who made it possible for a Black person to head NASA.

A few posts ago I refered to dialectical materialism which presents an explanation to how and why society develops in a perpetual chain of transitions from one state to another. Accordingly, there are theses and antitheses. One understands wealth in one way and the other in another. Happiness, joy, pride, advancements etc are all such concepts. History keeps an account of the various consequences of this fight between theses and antitheses.

Just remember the clash between the defenders of AC and DC, steam engine and combustion chamber engine, Ghandhi and Britain. In each one of these cases there was a thesis and an antithesis. The world would evolve in exactly the opposite direction had anyone of the dropped alternatives were chosen. This applies to ideas, opinions, philosophies and economic models too. In other words, the winner determines the outcome. It is not enough to have a more benign point of view. One needs to find a way to enforce it. There is no way to affect any changes in the world unless you have coercion and there seems to be no way to get it when all your intentions are humane and benign. Exceptions of course do not count.

This is why the good is always at the mercy of the bad.

There is a seed of truth in that. When there is a prospect of immense development people tend to cling together and work collectively for the same purpose to reap the imminent benefits. As time goes by however, the strength of this bond is severed and when society loses much of its efficiency destruction begins.

Nevertheless, it must be noted that there is quite a long period of time between these ends. There is a beginning phase marked by rapid development followed by generations of healthy and steady increase. We would expect a plateau to follow that and a steady decline interrupted by a complete collapse which marks the end of a regime. With the remains of the past civilization people set out to form a new one and this continues in vicious circle.

American civilization has made undeniable contributions to the entire world but it is not a unique civilization. Instead, it is a product of the strong winds of change that led to the realization of great geographical discoveries. The riches of the new continents were immense and were waiting to be utilized by an advanced society. It was Europeans who capitalized on this new opportunity to form wealthier lives. Albeit the entire process was marked by horrible sins and crimes committed against humanity. Slavery and racism are sadly in the texture of what we call as European civilization. It is still going quite strong to date. Somewhere in their mind set, there are still the seeds of it. I have seen this in business, in social relations and everything.

The written history of Turks is relatively short compared to those of the Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks or Arabs.

The length of history has no bearing on what you are doing now. You may have a history of a few centuries but  if you can raise the likes of Edison, Morse,Franklin,Wright Brothers and if you have eminent scientists of world renown who got you on the moon and sent robots to Mars, the shortness of your history deserves an accolade not criticism.

I wish everyone a happy feast of sacrifice.

I wish modern technology could be used instead of slaughtering animals in the streets.

I hope no scars are left in the psychologies of children witnessing the slaughter of those animals in a blood bath.

I wish new generation could take this opportunity to remember their parents who raised them.

I wish there is less friction among people and that they take this chance to forgive past mistakes.

Amen.

I also hope people are not calling other people cheap. This is just football meant for entertainment.

To put the record straight ManU are undeniably the better team should any comparisons be made between the two teams. Although a very old team itself, BJK´s history is no where as rich as ManU´s. I still remember your key players from the 80´s; this alone tells the story.

Nevertheless, this is football and you can always lose to a weaker side, if you are not on form or too reluctant to play. Here the problem was obviously Ferguson´s decision to play young and inexperienced players. If I were him, I would do exactly the same thing. I would also look for other opportunities to get them to show off themselves whenever I feel at ease with the forthcoming fixtures and rankings.

Having said that we must also remember that this ancient club of Besiktas have supporters who have never thought about giving up on their team despite long spells of failures and bad football. They have even broken a few records in decibels and have been entitled as the noisiest supporters of the world. (don´t ask for the source, I´ve just read it in the newspapers).

It is always fun to watch the likes of ManU, Barcelona, Real Madrid and sometimes Fenerbahce, Galatasaray and Besiktas. Football is a beautiful game...

It was an official Champions League match. I don´t think SAF targeted a loss. On the contrary, he was depending on the appetite of his young squad. This is a common method for seasoned British trainers. There are multiple benefits: you avoid injuries of your important players, give them a chance to rest, avoid red or yellow cards and get around with the feeling of satisfaction. For young players, it is a great chance for displaying their skills. In the past, this scheme has almost always worked.

As for yesterday´s match. no one can say, there was a lack of skill or determination. These young guys fought relentlessly till the end. It seems they have a lot quality too. Besiktas was a good example for them for understanding in what departments they have short comings. There are things that can only be learned in a real match.