Turkey re-elects governing party

Mr Erdogan said that "democracy has passed a very important test" Supporters of Turkey's governing AK Party are celebrating after the country's prime minister claimed a comprehensive general election victory. Recep Tayyip Erdogan vowed to work for national unity after his party won re-election with almost 50% of votes. He told cheering crowds in Ankara that the AKP victory was a triumph for Turkish democracy. Opponents had insisted that a win for the Islamist-rooted AKP could undermine Turkey's secular traditions. The election was called after opposition parties in parliament blocked

the AK Party's nominee for the post of president, causing political deadlock. But the BBC's Chris Morris, in Ankara, the Turkish capital, says the AKP has now scored a stunning victory, and those who still believe it is a threat to the secular system are clearly in a minority. The secularists' fear and dislike of political Islam is very real and not feigned BBC Europe editor Mark Mardell   Read Mark's thoughts in full Send us your reaction Reports said the AKP had won about 47% of the nationwide vote after some three-quarters of votes were counted. Two opposition parties won the 10% share needed to guarantee seats in parliament: the secularist Republican People's Party (CHP) polled 20%, and the right-wing Nationalist Action Party (MHP) 14%. Those gains meant the AK Party would have about 340 seats in the 550-member parliament, Turkish media said. Estimates said the CHP would win 112 seats and the MHP 70 seats, with about 25 going to independent candidates, including pro-Kurdish politicians. Unity call Speaking in Ankara, Mr Erdogan said his party would continue pursuing Turkey's ambitions of joining the European Union.   In pictures: Victory party Turkish election primer Turkish voters' views In front of cheering crowds waving Turkish flags and the blue flags of the AKP, Mr Erdogan said he would work for all Turkish people, no matter who they had voted for. "Democracy has passed a very important test," he said, pledging to continue economic and democratic reforms. "Whoever you have voted for... We respect your choices. We regard your differences as part of our pluralist democracy. It is our responsibility to safeguard this richness." He also vowed to continue the fight against Kurdish rebels in the east of Turkey. Sentiments high Voting was compulsory and turnout was reported to be extremely high. Some 42 million people were eligible to vote in the poll, while 14 parties vied for seats in parliament. Poling stations were busy from early on Sunday, with supporters of the secular establishment out in force as well as AKP voters. Many people broke into applause as Turkey's military chief of staff arrived to cast his vote. In the run-up to the election generals had warned that the army was prepared to step in to defend Turkey's strict secular system. The deadlock in parliament emerged when the AKP tried to nominate Abdullah Gul, a former foreign minister, for the post of president - traditionally a secular figurehead for the republic. Opposition parties blocked Mr Gul's appointment, as well as government reforms proposing direct elections to choose a president. Turkey's current president and its secularist establishment have vowed to resist what they regard as the Islamist agenda of the AK Party. Mr Erdogan's government dismisses that portrayal, pointing to its record of five straight years of economic growth and the start of membership negotiations with the European Union. Mark Mardell 22 Jul 07, 05:22 PM Will Turkey give a vote of confidence to the new men from Kayseri, welcome the unlikely pitch-invaders? Or will whoever wins do so by default, for the lack of a third way? It's a broiling hot election day in Ankara. The sale and consumption of alcohol is banned during polling day, which may not be such a bad thing as you wouldn't want your brains scrambled any more than they are by the heat. Constant draughts of water are what you need and I start my day with Duysun Beyhan, one of the men who delivers it. He used to be a taxi driver, but now has his own van and delivers water to the newly-built pink and peach houses on the outskirts of Ankara where he lives with his wife and three daughters.

Yorum

bad Yazar abdullah efendi açık 2007-07-06 22:51:20 time is bad...

Yes Brother, Yazar Sanih açık 2007-07-11 10:01:53 Yes brother you are right...

Yazar sadi önal açık 2007-07-14 23:47:12 "Eat less fatty food and salt and more fruit and vegetables"    Does this advice also contain young people. Especially, I'm curiors about fatty food and salt. If you reply to my question, I would be happy.

açıklama Yazar Sanih açık 2007-07-23 10:12:59 Bu yorumların üstünde daha önce alzheimer başlıklı bir yazı vardı. O sislinmiş yerine bu yazı konulmuş. Anlaşılan O eski yazıya yazılan yorumlar silinmemiş. bu yazının altında kalakalmış. Yorumların yukarıdaki yazıyla alakasının olmadığı dikkate alınmalı... saygıyla...

Yazar Melitenli açık 2007-07-24 22:22:18 Democracy Affirmed   E-Mail  Print   Save   Share   Digg   Facebook   Newsvine   Permalink        Published: July 24, 2007  The impressive re-election victory scored by Turkey's conservative Muslim ruling party is a tribute to the growing maturity of that country's politics and an inspiration for the cause of democracy in the broader Muslim world.     Voters rightly rejected the claim asserted by the traditional military-secular establishment that there is any fundamental incompatibility between democracy and Islam. Instead, they rewarded a party that has given the country its most competent and successful government in recent decades. That is exactly how democracy is supposed to work.     Since the Justice and Development Party (known by its Turkish initials, AK) came to power almost five years ago, its market-oriented policies have promoted strong economic growth and helped bring runaway inflation back under control. In its pursuit of European Union membership, AK has also pushed through a series of legal reforms that have expanded human rights and brought Turkish law closer to European standards.     Those reforms have stalled in the face of opposition from generals and civilian nationalists and discouraging signals from the E.U. about Turkish membership. The Kurdish minority is still subject to discriminatory legal restrictions. So is the ruling party's main constituency, observant Muslims.     The AK should use its huge victory to reinvigorate the drive for reforms, and not just for its Muslim supporters. But it still must be careful not to provoke a military leadership that sees itself as the guardian of secular nationalism and has been less than scrupulous about respecting electoral democracy. The AK, in contrast, has broadened its support by moving away from its original, narrowly Islamic roots. It is still a visibly Muslim party, but it is also a visibly democratic and tolerant party.     Turkey's generals should heed the voters. Washington should continue to press Turkey's case for E.U. membership. The example of a successful Muslim democracy can be a powerful weapon in the war of ideas against Islamic terrorism.   --   ( Sayın Dr. Ahmet Cetinbudaklar'dan alınmıştır)

Yazar Melitenli açık 2007-07-24 22:26:32 Backlash in rich nations against globalisation  By Chris Giles in London   Published: July 22 2007 18:11 | Last updated: July 22 2007 18:11  A popular backlash against globalisation and the leaders of the world’s largest companies is sweeping all rich countries, an FT/Harris poll shows.  Large majorities of people in the US and in Europe want higher taxation for the rich and even pay caps for corporate executives to counter what they believe are unjustified rewards and the negative effects of globalisation.   Pressure for higher taxes on rich    Daily View: Chris Giles on a backlash against globalisation and the leaders of the world’s leading companies  Viewing globalisation as an overwhelmingly negative force, citizens of rich countries are looking to governments to cushion the blows they perceive have come from the liberalisation of their economies to trade with emerging countries.  Those polled in Britain, France, the US and Spain were about three times more likely to say globalisation was having a negative rather than a positive effect on their countries. The majority was smaller in Germany, with its large export base.   Corporate leaders fared little better, with 5 per cent or fewer of those polled in the US and all large European economies (except Italy) saying they had a great deal of admiration for those who run large companies. In these countries, between a third and a half said they had no admiration at all for corporate bosses.   In response to fears of globalisation and rising inequality, the public in all the rich countries surveyed – the US, Germany, UK, France, Italy and Spain – want their governments to increase taxation on those with the highest incomes. In European countries, a large majority want governments to go further and to impose pay caps on the heads of companies.   Europeans still overwhelmingly support the principle of free competition within the European Union, contrary to Nicolas Sarkozy’s wishes at the recent European summit, but in France, Germany and Spain, the populations want their political leaders to play a larger role in managing their economies.   The depth of anti-globalisation feeling in the FT/Harris poll, which surveyed more than 1,000 people online in each of the six countries, will dismay policy-makers and corporate executives. Their view that opening economies to freer trade is beneficial to poor and rich countries alike is not shared by the citizens of rich countries, regardless of how liberal their economic traditions.   The issue of rising inequality is now high on the political agenda of every country and will feature prominently in the 2008 US presidential election.

Yazar Melitenli açık 2007-07-24 22:27:06 America must pull out of Iraq to contain civil war  By Samuel Berger and Bruce Riedel   Published: July 23 2007 Financial Times  A clear US commitment to a complete, irreversible withdrawal from Iraq may now be the only way to develop a regional concert of powers that could work with Iraqis to try to stabilise the country and cauterise the conflict.  The continuing US and British occupation is a roadblock to that co-operation. The galvanising impact of a decision to depart unequivocally can be the last best chance at preventing the conflict from boiling over beyond Iraq to the whole region. How we design and implement our departure is our last significant remaining leverage.  There is no guarantee that this will work, but geopolitical self-interest may encourage wary co-operation from Iraq's neighbours. Iran does not need to invade Iraq to have influence there. The Saudis and Jordanians do not have the military capability to invade. The Syrians are not interested and, in spite of some sabre-rattling, the Turks do not need more Kurds to try to pacify. Focusing on ending the occupation and bringing order in its wake may be the best chance left to end our involvement while keeping the civil war contained to Iraq.  None of Iraq's neighbours was eager for the invasion four years ago, with the possible exception of Kuwait. All of them saw the US and UK occupation as inherently destabilising, especially if it looked permanent. All are now worried that the civil war in Iraq will serve as a breeding ground for terror and violence that will be increasingly exported to their own countries. Iraq is already a safe haven for al-Qaeda terrorists who have attacked Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon, and for PKK terrorists who attack Turkey. Now al-Qaeda is threatening to attack Iran for meddling on the side of the Shia in Iraq against the Sunni Arab minority.  But these countries cannot work constructively with an American occupation army - especially not Iran, which has the most capability to be a decisive force given its intimate ties to virtually every Shia and Kurdish politician, its geography and its economic connections. Most of all Tehran wants to see the US leave Iraq for good so it cannot be a base against Iran. The Saudis and Jordanians find it both difficult and less urgent to engage when the occupation is open-ended. The Syrians find Iraq to be a good place to keep America bogged down and less threatening. The Turks fear that a long-term American presence encourages Kurdish -separatism.  These calculations may well change once there is a clear time-line for complete American and British withdrawal and the end of occupation. At that point it is in the self interest of each of the neighbours to concentrate on shaping post-occupation Iraq and especially preventing the terrorist threat that instability creates. All Iraq's neighbours will find it easier to engage when it is not in support of an occupation army. None will want to see another gain direct control of part or all of Iraq. All will want to avoid a power vacuum for al-Qaeda and other terrorists. We should seek to build on the narrow moment of time when those self-interests might be put into harmony to stabilise Iraq.  For Iraqis as well it is imperative that the US make clear now what it should have been saying from day one: we plan no permanent military presence in Iraq, no bases and no special relationship. We want a fully independent Iraq, not a client state. We should abandon any thought of staying in Iraq for decades as if it were South Korea or Germany. When we suggest such it only rallies more recruits for al-Qaeda, especially foreign suicide bombers. The best way to isolate al-Qaeda is to pull the occupation out from under it.  The United Nations should be invited to convene and administer a contact group of the neighbours that would address several key issues in conjunction with the Iraqi government. At the top of the list would be agreement to assist rather than exploit the peaceful and orderly withdrawal of all foreign military forces from Iraq, agreement to respect the territorial integrity of Iraq, agreement to assist the government of Iraq in controlling and stabilising its territory and funding of a major assistance package.  These are key issues for the transition from occupation to post-occupation. For the US it is obviously important to get help in making the withdrawal of our forces as smooth as possible. We should try to leave behind a regional order that has a chance for stability.  Mr Berger was US national security adviser from 1997-2000. Mr Riedel is senior fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Studies, Brookings Institute

Yazar Melitenli açık 2007-07-24 22:28:15 Leading article: The struggle for a country's soul   Published: 21 July 2007, The Independent  Pressures from the various forces in Turkish society have been building for some time now. Despite its economically liberal and modernising record in office, the ruling AK Party has been probing the staunchly secularist constitution. The AKP put forward the devoutly religious foreign minister Abdullah Gul for the post of president earlier this year. And it has mooted a relaxation of the ban on headscarves in government buildings.   As a result of this, hard-line secularists have been growing restive. Their supporters came out in force to demonstrate against Mr Gul's appointment, forcing the government to back down. The nationalist establishment has been flexing its muscles too, pressing for the prosecution of those who have "insulted Turkishness". The murder of the Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant Dink in Istanbul by a young man with links to the army also raises disturbing questions about the military's commitment to the rule of law. Meanwhile, the Kurdish minority in the south east has been stirring. The autocratic Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has threatened an invasion of the Kurdish-controlled region of Iraq if Kurdish guerrilla attacks within Turkey's borders do not cease.  Sadly, tomorrow's elections are unlikely to help to resolve Turkey's inner contradictions. The AKP is likely to retain power with a reduced majority. But a question mark remains over the identity of the new candidate the party will nominate for the presidency. If it puts forward another candidate with a background in political Islam, another constitutional crisis could be in store. Growing Kurdish autonomy in Iraq presents a destabilising threat too, as it is likely to intensify separatist sentiment among Turkish Kurds. We can only hope that the likely increase in Kurdish representation in parliament will boost the search for a political settlement. The behaviour of the European Union will be crucial too. If there is more scorn poured on Turkey's EU membership application by European capitals, the forces of hard-line nationalism in the country will inevitably grow stronger.  All the signs are that we are in the early stages of a struggle for Turkey's soul. It is a struggle with implications for democracy, Islam and secularism around the world. It will shape the future of the European Union and the Middle East. Whether we realise it or not, we all have a strong interest in the outcome.

Yazar Melitenli açık 2007-07-24 22:29:30 The World Bank Should Resign    THE BROUHAHA OVER PAULWOLFOWITZ AND THEWORLD BANK  bluntly raises the question: Why do  we need this institution? The same  can be asked about its sibling, the  International Monetary Fund.  Both were begun in late 1944, during  the final stages of WWII. The IMF’s  mission was to give countries temporary  short-term loans so they could put  their economic houses in order, coping  with temporary balance-of-payment  problems without resorting to destructive  tariffs or massive devaluations. During the 1930s countries had  resorted to beggar-thy-neighbor policies,  such as devaluing currencies and  imposing trade and capital restrictions.  Trade shriveled, as did flows of  capital. The result was all-around impoverishment.  Politically, the Great  Depression made possible the rise of  Nazism and the Second World War.  The World Bank was designed to  help countries, particularly developing  ones, finance major infrastructure  projects. In the aftermath of the Depression the concept of free  markets was in disrepute. The thinking was that nonmarket institutions  were necessary to help keep economies humming and  growing. By financing dams, highways and steel mills, the World  Bank would hasten recovery from the war and, over the long  term, would help less developed nations achieve rapid growth.  With the collapse of fixed exchange rates in the early 1970s,  the IMF morphed into the doctor for governments in financial  crisis. It made longer-term loans with so-called conditionalities,  i.e., prescriptions to get an economy out of the sick ward.  The trouble is that the aftereffects of taking IMF medicine are  usually worse than the disease. High taxes, import restrictions  and inflation-inducing devaluations (the lessons of the 1930s had  been forgotten) became the IMF’s routine medications. It also  pressured governments to do away with popular food and fuel  subsidies; nice in theory, but the abrupt removal of such lifelines  in times of distress has often led to riots.  The IMF became a disastrously destructive force for developing  countries. Nations that blossomed did so by following policies that  are diametrically opposed to those routinely imposed by the IMF.  One good thing to come out of this decade’s inflationary  commodities boom is that countries don’t need to borrow from  the IMF and are, thankfully, free to pursue more positive policies.  This boom has given Brazil and other commodity-rich nations  windfall revenues. Even that perpetual deadbeat, Argentina, was  able to flip the bird at the IMF. The money it saved by stiffing private  creditors (it paid dollar-denominated debt holders only 15 cents  on the dollar) and the money that gushed in as commodities rose  in price enabled Buenos Aires to pay off its IMF obligations.  The World Bank also became a destructive force by turning a  blind eye to internal corruption when awarding lucrative construction  contracts and by ignoring massive corruption in its  client countries. Private capital can just as easily finance a sound  capital project as can the World Bank. Global financial markets  are quick to underwrite promising infrastructures. The projects  that private marketers don’t touch are almost always by definition  vainglorious undertakings that do nothing to enhance  economic growth. The only beneficiaries are politically favored  contractors and government ministers and bureaucrats.  What the designers of the World Bank didn’t realize was that  putting in a road or a steel mill does not trigger sustained economic  growth. Good economic policy, such as low taxes, sound  money, property rights and ease in setting up legal businesses,  etc., does.  Pieces of these institutions should be preserved. The World Bank  has an economic research section that each year turns out a firstrate  book called Doing Business, which surveys 175 economies on  everything from how many licenses you need to start a business  to enforcing contracts to securities transparency. It’s an eye-opener.  And it’s no surprise that countries that have the rule of law and  that make it easy for entrepreneurs to operate legally tend to do far  better than countries that don’t. Poor African and Latin American  nations rank near the bottom in this survey.  The IMF could still provide technical assistance to countries  in setting up sensible banking institutions.  These useful activities could operate at the merest fraction of  the current World Bank and IMF budgets. We would do the  developing nations a world of good by rapidly putting these institutions  out to pasture. They have long, long outlived whatever  usefulness they may have had.

SÄ°YASETÄ°N YENÄ°DEN ÅžEKÄ°LLENMESÄ° Yazar Sanih açık 2007-07-27 05:23:07 Nusret bey'in Seçim 2007 sonuçlarını tahlil eden baÅŸka bir yazısını 25. 07. 2007 tarihli Vakit gazetesinden alıntılayarak aÅŸağıda Sunuyorum:    SÄ°YASETÄ°N YENÄ°DEN ÅžEKÄ°LLENMESÄ°    Nusret ÇİÇEK    Seçim sonuçlarına partizanlık gözlüğünü çıkartıp baktığımızda görürüz ki deden kalma parti tutmak tutkuları tarih olmak üzeredir.  Åžartlar yeni oluÅŸumları, yeni simaları gerektiriyor.  Hele de bu seçimlerde 28 Åžubat zihniyetine karşı halkta oluÅŸan bilinç altı tepkilerin seçim sandıklarında yeniden mesafeler aldığını görüyoruz. Müslüman halkımız başörtüsü gibi dayatmaları lâik Cumhuriyet diye yutturan azınlığa bir sefer daha demokrasi dersi vermiÅŸ oldu ki anlayan anlasın…  Kısadan hisse; bu seçim sonuçları ortalığı irtica virüsüne karşı “Cumhuriyete sahip çıkın” mitingleri ile uyarmaya çalışan kökten lâikçiler için bir baÅŸarı deÄŸil, aksine bir hezimettir. Halk ulusalcının lâikçiliÄŸini, cumhuriyetçiliÄŸini bilmiyor, anlamıyor, tasvip etmiyor.   Toplumu boÅŸ ÅŸeylerle gerenlerin popülist politikaları bu seçimde hiç tutmadı.  Gerçekçi olmak lazım.   Ä°lk defa iktidar gemisini kayalara çarptırmadan menziline kadar götüren bir siyasi çalışmaya ÅŸahit oluyoruz. Bu kadar ÅŸeytanı oyunlar, bu kadar çeteler, bu kadar eli kanlı örgütlerin karşısında seçimleri zamanında alıp zamanına kadar götürmek gerçekten kolay bir iÅŸ deÄŸildir. Zamanın zamanı tutması siyasette en büyük baÅŸarı sayılır.  Bu seçim sonuçlarında bakın neler var:   Görünen odur ki CHP’nin Milli Åžef düşüncesine dayanan misyonu artık tükenmiÅŸtir. CHP’den bir daha 6 mızraklı CHP çıkmayacak…  Köfte, ekmek de siyasetin gerçekleri ile alakalı bir konu olmayıp amigo çalışmalarında bir süre için iÅŸe yarasa da geçicidir.  O da zaten halktan aldığı cevap sonucu geçti gitti…  Dersler bir deÄŸil ki…   Halk Köşk’ün duruÅŸunu, Anayasa Mahkemesinin kocaman 367’sayısını “toplantı yeter sayısı” olarak görmesini, muhtıraları asla tasvip etmedi.   DSP seçmeninin Ecevit’ten vasiyet aldığı Baykal karşıtı duruÅŸu bir sefer daha bariz bir ÅŸekilde sandıkta göstererek DSP oylarının CHP yerine MHP’yi tercih etmesi ilginç bir geliÅŸmedir.  Hırçınlık, uzlaÅŸmasızlık Baykal’ı yedi bitirdi…  …  Yeni dönemde Kürtçülük ve de Türkçülük ülkenin başını aÄŸrıtacak…  Kürtçülüğü GüneydoÄŸu’da bir ÅŸeriat engeli olarak sunanların bölgelerindeki oy kaybı kadar MHP’nin de Türkçülükte oy kaybı sözkonusdur.  K.MaraÅŸ, Çorum, Yozgat, Kayseri, KırÅŸehir gibi ÅŸehirlerde MHP’nin eski seçmeni AK partisine kaydı. Bu demektir ki ister Kürtler olsun, ister Türkler olsun Müslüman halkımız inancı gereÄŸi ırkçılığı benimsemiyor.  O zaman MHP’nin barajı aÅŸmasındaki sırrı neye göre deÄŸerlendireceÄŸiz?  MHP, beklentilerin aksine elde etmiÅŸ olduÄŸu kazanımını bana göre sola borçludur. Görülüyor ki CHP’nin düştüğü yörelerde MHP yükseldi. Oysaki solun ülke genelindeki oyu % 30’lara yakın. Åžimdi ise birleÅŸik bir CHP yarım AK partisi etmiyor…  Zor oyunu bozunca kozlar yer deÄŸiÅŸtirdi.  Artık bu saatten sonra yeni bir CHP’leÅŸme ideolojisinin MHP de devam edeceÄŸini söylemek yanlış bir tespit olmaz.   Kısacası MHP CHP’leÅŸti…  Seçim çalışmalarında Ä°lhan Selçuk gibi eski bir Marksist’tin iki oydan bir oyunu MHP’ye bağışlama kampanyası boÅŸuna deÄŸildi.Kanal Türk televizyonun da “Cumhuriyetinize sahip çıkın” mitingleri MHP’ye yaradı.Baktılar ki Baykal bu iÅŸi beceremeyecek, AK partisinin karşısına Bahçeli’yi yeni bir umut olsun diye diktiler.   Onun için MHP’ye verilen beleÅŸ oylar ülkücülerden ziyade Ulusalcı kadrolara aittir.   Bu saatten sonra saÄŸdaki mevcut ataerkil partilerle bir yere varılamayacağı kesin. AÄŸar, Mesut Yılmaz, Erkan Mumcu yıpranan liderler arasında…   Gidiciler, yolları açık olsun…  Küçüklerini saymıyoruz.  Hesap ÅŸudur.  Sadece başörtüsü olayından yola çıkarak muhafazakar kesimin nüfusa göre oranı %80’dır. % 46’si AK partisine oy verdiÄŸine göre geride %35’lere varan bir sayının olduÄŸunu görüyoruz. Küçümsenecek bir oran sayılmaz…  Bu sayı beÅŸ aÅŸağı beÅŸ yukarı ülkücüleri de içerisine alan Ä°slam’ı kesimindir.  Yanı, AK partisinden sorgusuz sualsiz atılanlarla MHP’den ürken ülkücüler.  Åžimdi bu cenahın ileride alternatif olacak ÅŸekilde bir araya gelerek yeni oluÅŸumlar çerçevesinde plan, proje üreteceklerine pek yakında ÅŸahit olacağız.  Bekleyelim ve görelim. 24.7.2007 Nusret ÇİÇEK

Veysi Erken hocamızdan ilginç bir tespit Yazar Sanih açık 2007-08-01 00:31:11 Subject: Manisa'nın Saruhanlı ilçesine baÄŸlı DEVELÄ° köyü.    Develi, Manisa'nın Saruhanlı ilçesine baÄŸlı bir köy.  Bundan iki yıl önce Develi köylüleri parti parti, dernek dernek, sendika sendika gezdiler.   "Köyümüze çöplük yapacaklar, bizi kurtarın" diye yardım istediler.  Kapılar yüzlerine kapandı.    TKP'ye geldiler.  TKP yöneticileri, hukukçularla, tarım uzmanlarıyla, çevrecilerle birlikte harekete geçti, "Develi çöplük olmasın" kampanyası baÅŸlattı.   TKP'liler Develi halkına hukuksal, siyasal, örgütsel, eylemsel destek verdi.  Çevre dostu, deÄŸerli avukat Åžehrazat Mercan, titiz bir hukuk mücadelesi yürüttü.    Sonunda idare mahkemesi yürütmeyi durdurma kararı verdi, çöplük projesi durduruldu.   Bu arada Develi halkı ile TKP kaynaÅŸtı, akraba gibi oldu. Develililer de TKP kimliÄŸini benimsedi, sevdi, sahiplendi.   Öyle ki, köyde düzenlenen ÅŸenliklerin, keÅŸkek günlerinin onur konukları TKP'lilerdi .     Seçim günü geldi çattı.  Sandıklar açıldı.  Sonuçları veriyorum.  Çöplük projesinin sahibi AKP, 194 oy alarak birinci parti oldu.     DP 164 oy, MHP 72 oy, CHP 55 oy, GP 7 oy, SP 2 oy, LDP 2 oy, HYP 1 oy aldı.     Develi halkıyla gece gündüz çalışan, çöplük projesinin durdurulmasına önayak olan TKP ise rakamla "0", yazıyla "sıfır" oy aldı.     22 Temmuz 2007 seçimlerinin sonucunu "siyaset sosyolojisi" ve "sosyal psikoloji" alanındaki akademisyenlerin enine boyuna incelemesi gerekiyor.     Bu köyün halkının kimlik, kiÅŸilik, ÅŸahsiyet, haysiyet, karakter vs. yapısı da incelenmeli bence...

Sadece kayıtlı kullanıcılar yorum yazabilirler.
Lütfen hesabınıza giriş yapınız veya kayıt olunuz.

Powered by AkoComment 2.0!