----- Özgün İleti -----
Kimden: Polat Kaya
Kime: b_c_n_2003@yahoogroups.com
Gönderme tarihi: Thursday, July 31, 2003 9:24 PM
Konu: [bcn_2003] Messages from "Nostratica"

Dear Friends,

During these last few weeks, you have been witnessing some very active
message movement in this forum.  This is as a result of my list of English
words which I showed to be anagrams of Turkish words and phrases.
Along with the list, I explained that the Indo-European and Semitic
languages are manufactured languages from the much older Turkish. The
process used for this purpose was the simple technique of
"anagrammatizing".  Even one of the recent writers noted that
Indo-European languages were invented languages and their inventors
were the religious people.

Evidently, some people who call themselves "linguists" were very
bothered from all this.  Instead of presenting scholarly talk with
coherent essays, they chose to be linguistic dogmatists claiming that
only they, because they had gone to linguistic schools and gotten a
certificate, can talk about linguistics and put forward ideas.
According to them, no other person outside linguistics, irregardless
of their qualifications, can talk on the subject matter or raise a
voice against the established views.  The sad part of all these
so-called discussions is that these "linguists" and their supporters
have chosen to attack me on a personel level by villifying me and my
ideas. These attackers (linguists) somehow have not even learned how
to discuss a new idea in a civilized manner, let alone express their
views and ask questions in a scholarly manner. Most of what I have
seen from them is noise designed to further confuse an already
confused topic.

For instance, I introduced the English word "ATONE" and "ATONEMENT"
and said that they were anagrams of Turkish "UTAN" and "UTANMA EDIN"
respectively.  Along comes an "Abdullah" who mocks this, villifies me
and then signs off his email with "UTAN EDIN!" directed at me.  This
act itself is silly, childish and immature.  How am I expected to
carry on a serious and mature discussion on a rational level when I am
confronted with this kind of immaturity?

In this forum, I have presented many original papers with revelations
that are contrary to the established views. Up to several years ago,
I, too, was thinking along the same line as the established views.
However, after reading the so-called Pelasgian writing on the Lemnos
Island Stela and finding that it was Turkish, I began to question more
and more.

Up to that point, I was believing everything the textbooks were saying
about the ancient world but after finding that the Pelasgians, i.e.,
the native people of ancient so-called Greece before the Greeks got
there, were speaking Turkish and were related to Etruscans and
Thracians, and Trojans, and Minoans and even, in fact, to the Ionians
(AY HANS of ancient Yunanistan), I began to suspect everything.
Particularly, when I found out that Homer was referring to TROY as
ILIUM, I realized that ILIUM was nothing but Turkish ILIM-U meaning
"It is my country".

After that, I read Homer's Iliad and Odysseus with a magnifying glass
and soon discovered that many of the character names were anagrams of
Turkish words and phrases representing personifications of different
concepts and deities. From that point on, all of my intense research
showed me that things were not the way that they have been presented.
The picture that was forming was that the ancient world was a Turkic
speaking Turanian world (i.e., Turkish).  This was supported, not only
from the linguistic point of view, but also from the archeological
artifacts that were distributed all over the world.

One of the distinct features of the ancient Turanians was their
distinct conical headdress which is still used by Turkish people in
many parts of Central Asia. Another distinct feature of the ancient
Turanians was that their tombstones had one top corner cut in a
slanted fashion.  In addition to Central Asia and other parts of Asia,
this kind of tombstone is found all over Europe all the way to Ireland
and Scotland and other places.

The more I researched, the more I realized that there was a big
deception going on regarding the ancient world.  Indeed the ancient
world was a Turkic speaking world contrary to all the disinformation
that we have been subjected to.  When I mentioned my findings in this
forum, those who call themselves linguists went into denial mode and
attacked me from all sides.

I regard all those who are attacking me as not knowing the ancient
facts as I do.  Some of the attackers may simply be defending their
own turf, but there may be others who actually know what has gone on
in the past regarding the trinity sky-god religion of the ancient
Turanians and how it was destroyed and usurped, and similarly how the
ancient Turanian language of Turkish was used to manufacture new languages.

With my essays and discussions in this forum, I have been completely
open. I realize that my revelations are contrary to the established
views.  I explained most everything in an easy-to-understand fashion
and presented 125 English words as a small sample of my supporting
evidence.  This 125 word sample constitutes powerful evidence of a
deception having taken place.  The deception is that English, and
other IE lnguages (and Semitic languages) have used Turkish words and
phrases to generate words in their languages but have not been
truthful about it.  The new "Indo-European" words are created by
altering and anagrammatizing the Turkish words and phrases so that
their Turkishness is cleverly camouflaged.  Dictionaries that purport
to giving word etymologies have collaborated in this deception by
pointing to mostly Greek ans Latin sources, yet the are themselves are
manufactured languages. Of course, in such matters no mention of
Turkish is ever made. The deception is actually much larger because it
involves hiding the fact that the ancient world was a Turkic speaking
Turanian world with a Turkic trinity Sky-God religion (so-called

It should not be thought that I am blurting big conclusions without
having done my homework.  I have read and researched many topics
ranging from ancient Masar (Egypt) to religion.  My research and
analysis was thorough, my detective work immaculate.  My keen
observation and vision allowed me to penetrate the mountains of
misinformation out there. With my detailed descriptions that I shared
with you all in this forum, I held a light to brighten the path that
leads to future understanding of linguistics.  Unfortunately, some who
have been in the dark for so long have chosen to refuse my light
because its intensity disturbs their eyes. Hence, they rush and
desperately try to close every opening where light may be entering
their dark chamber in order to keep the darkness intact. Some readers
have understandably asked me for proof and I have replied that the
words themselves are the living proof.  I cannot produce a two or
three thousand year old clearly written certificate admitting that
such an event was planned and executed.  Nobody else can either.  It
is understandable that those who took something not belonging to them,
in the past, would not leave behind such a document.  However, in the
process, they left behind clues that, when put together, form a
picture showing what happened.

In the latest incoming e-mails, someone called "John" is being
extremely aggressive.  John probably has not read my previous
writings.  I cannot repeat them here again but they are all in the
archives of this forum.  It would be beneficial for him, and others
who are interested, to read them. John most likely does not know what
deceptions have taken place in the past regarding the languages.

John accuses me with a concocted expression "FEM" implying
"falsehood".  It is unfortunate for "John" to make such a smear.  It
is not Polat Kaya that makes "falsehoods" but rather others that have
concocted "falsehoods" about the ancient world and have perpetrated
them up to now.  Polat Kaya simply saw their hands in the Turkish

John says  "Sakas" are Iranians implying that they are
"Indo-European".  He is wrong.  If he had investigated the "SAKA"
identity, he would find that they are Turks - contrary to his beliefs.
The term "Iranian" does not indicate a particular ethnicity.  In that
geography there have always been Tur/Turk peoples present before the
so-called Indo-European "Persians" were there. So what is being
portrayed today as "Iranian" or "Persian" is actually a mixture of
Turkish and later non-Turanians.  When they talk about Iran, they
rarely mention the fact that almost half of the present population are
Turks.  People have been conned so badly that it is difficult for them
to accept this fact now.

John says  HYKSOS is the Greek word that prevailed.  Yes, ancient
Greeks were one of the contributers to the confusion.  At every
opportunity, they anagrammatized and changed the ancient Turkic names
and words. Greek words keep coming to the surface because eurocentrics
would like to see it that way.  The Greek, Jewish and Latin religious
peoples were in ancient so-called Egypt by the thousands.  Not that
they were there to help the religious needs of the ancient Masarians
(so-called "Egyptians"), but rather to learn about the ancient
Masarian civilization and religion so that later, it could be a) used
to destroy them from within and b) then usurped to generate new
"religions" and "cultures".  That is why the most long-lasting
Tur/Turk state of human history has now become an extinct
civilization. Of course those religious cabalists also changed
everything Turkic wherever they found them.  It must be understood
that those ancient so-called "Egyptians" did not refer to themselves as
"Egyptians" (meaning Gypsies) nor was their land called "Egypt". 
These are the names given by the ancient Greeks to obliterate the
original names.

John would like to deny that "Troy" is an anagram of Turkish "TUR ÖY"
but even the Greek word "Troia" meaning "Troy" is an anagram of
Turkish "TUR-ÖYÜ" meaning "The house of TURS".  For John's
information, the name TUR is the national name of TUR/TURK peoples
although he may try to deny that too.

When critics say that Wallis Budge is outdated, they are trying to
suppress the validity of his works because this scholar was much more
truthful than many. Wallis Budge's works are not outdated.

In concluding, I want to reiterate that all that I have said still
stands irrespective of abrasive responses. So far, the responses from
those who oppose my views do not have any convincing power to make me
change my views. 

Best wishes to all,

Polat Kaya

July 31, 2003

"Biz Cevirmenlere N'oluyor!" bilgi toplulugu, allingus Profesyonel Yabanci Dil Cozumleri Ltd. Sti.'nin bir girisimidir.

Kurulus Bildirisini  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/b_c_n_2003/ bolgesinde okuyabilirsiniz.  Mayis 2001

Önemli Not:

Toplulugumuza  gonderilen iletilerdeki gorusler, bcn yoneticilerini ve uyelerini baglayici degildir. Her uye bcn'ye gonderdigi veya baska kisi ya da topluluklara yonlendirdigi iletilerden kendisinin sorumlu oldugunu kabul eder. Bilgi toplulugumuzdan ayrilmak istediginizde ileti gonderiniz: b_c_n_2003-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.