Year: 2010

THE VERY FIRST IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD: ADNAN OKTAR ESTABLISHES BROTHERHOOD BETWEEN JEWS AND MUSLIMS

The meeting Mr. Adnan Oktar held with the committee from Israel was followed with great interest both by the Islamic world and the West, and accepted to be a great step towards the establishment of peace in Middle East.
On January 20, 2010, Wednesday, Mr. Adnan Oktar held a press meeting with a broad committee from Israel including the leaders of various religious groups and Mr. Ayoob Kara, the Deputy Minister of the Development of the Negev and Galilee. The purpose of the press conference is declared to prevent the artificial tensions striven to be formed between Muslims and Jews, to ensure the establishment of peace in the region and make a call to the public for the release of Israeli Private Gilad Shalit, who has been held captive for a long time.

Mr. Adnan Oktar delivered a speech in the meeting and stated that Muslims and Jews were the descendants of Prophet Abraham (pbuh)—one party being the descendant of the sons of Ishmael whereas the other being the descendant of the sons of Jacob—and thus the conflicts occurring between the two communities were quite unfounded. He further added that Jews and Christians were committed to their trust and, just like in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), he would ensure best protection for them, and let neither Jews, nor Christians and nor Muslims be subjected to the slightest harm, stressing that this was the kind of attitude in compliance with the Qur’an and the hadith. Mr. Oktar stressed that the century in which we lived was the “Age of Mahdism” and that from then on wars, bloodshed and terror would come to an end, all weapons would be left and love would reign all over the world, the Middle East being the foremost. In reply to the question about the Iran’s nuclear weapon production, Mr. Oktar said that according to the Qur’an, the use of atomic bomb was unlawful (haram) and he sent a message to the Iranian Prime Minister Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about this issue and, indeed no sooner Iran made a statement declaring that atomic bomb was unlawful and thus Iran would not use it. Mr. Oktar also added that Turkish daily Hurriyet carried this statement to the headline.

Mr. Oktar, who also answered the questions about Private Gilad Shalit said, “It is very difficult for a person to be held captive under constant death threat.” Mr. Oktar also stated that Gilad wanted to rejoin his parents and that the pain suffered by both Gilad and his parents had to come to an end in no time. He also noted that the mothers, daughters and youth held in Israeli prisons had to also be released right away and added, “We desire each one of these brothers of ours come out of those prisons with the good morals of angels and become the kind of people who, by means of science and culture, struggle for peace.” Mr. Oktar noted that contacts with Noam Shalit, Gilad’s father, were continuing, that he would be coming to Turkey in the following days but the details of his itinerary were being withheld due to security concerns. Mr. Oktar stressed that the efforts of those who strove to form tension between Israel and Turkey were in vain and those who desired conflicts to occur between Jews and Muslims, Muslims and Christians, Shiites and Sunnis, Shiites and Wahabbites were people who were in favor of constant bloodshed but that they would not attain their goals.

Rather than acting in a way that fans the flames, Mr. Oktar stressed the importance of assuming an appeasing, forgiving attitude that left the past behind but thought ahead and employed a peaceful and moderate style, and made important statements regarding how the outlook of Muslims and Jews had to be. He also stated that the words in the Qur’an, “Do not take Christians and Jews as patrons” was misinterpreted by some people, that the phrase “do not take as patrons” actually meant not making Christians and Jews “governors” for themselves and that that was quite natural since, for the general comfort of the public, the governor of a Muslim community would be a Muslim, the governor of a Christian community would be Christian and the governor of a Jewish community would be a Jew. Mr. Oktar reminded that the People of the Book lived at ease in our Prophet’s (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) time, that during the time of the Ottoman Empire, Jews were brought all the way from Spain, our lands were opened to them and they were placed and hosted there in the best way possible. Mr. Oktar added that just as it was the case in the past, people had to live in bliss.

Other participants of the meeting drew attention to the importance of holding such a meeting for peace and brotherhood. Rabbi Yeshayahu Hollander, the Chairman of the Sanhedrin Court for B’nai Noah, read the message sent by Syrian mufti expressing his support for the initiation and stressed that the union of those who believe in only one Allah was a great power. Mr. Ayoob Kara, the Deputy Minister of the Development of the Negev and Galilee, said he believed this meeting would be instrumental in leading to a very noteworthy change in the Islamic world and expressed his happiness of being a part of this initiation. Hurrian Dimitri, the Orthodox Christian Leader, said the purpose of their existence in Istanbul and the message they would like to convey was the co-existence of all religions with love, brotherhood and peace and stated that, just like our Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), Mr. Adnan Oktar was a very great person who became instrumental in changing all violence and prejudices.

The meeting was followed with great interest both by the local and foreign press. Mr. Oktar stated that the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) would appear very soon, no wars would any longer take place, and the world had entered an era in which science, arts and aesthetics would prosper and gave the glad tidings of the establishment of the Turkish-Islamic Union in the very near future. “Two years ago I told that visas would be removed and Turkish Islamic Union would be established and this is how the events proceed now”, said Adnan Oktar. He added that a great unity of love and friendship had started to unfold and this unity would be the guarantee of peace on Earth.

The attendants from Israeli delegation are:

1 ) Mr. Ayoob Kara – The Deputy Minister of the Development of the Negev and Galilee (Deputy Minister Kara is the closest non Jewish person to the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and has a vision to develop a strong and warm relationship between Jews, Muslims, Christians and all other religions.)
2 ) Rabbi Yeshayahu Hollander – From Sanhedrin the Rabbinical Court in Jerusalem, Jerusalem Court for Issues of Bnei Noah
3 ) Rabbi Ben Abrahamson – Historian & consultant to the Rabbinical Court of Jerusalem, Sanhedrin relating Islam religion
4 ) Mr. Efraim Lahav – Senior Strategic Advisor Deputy Minister, Office of The Prime Minister; Chairman of Academic Union of Israeli Civil Workers; General Director Academic Association in Israel
5 ) Sheikh Ameen Kablan – Deputy of the Druze community
6 ) Mr. Hurrian Dimitri – Orthodox Christian leader
7 ) Mr. Ataf Krinawi – Bedouin leader
8 ) Mr. Japhet Tsedaka – Head of the Samaritan community

20 January 2010

January 21, 2010
How the Turks Saved the Jews from Genocide

by Shelomo Alfassa

In the fall of 1921 a Turkish steam ship sailed into New York harbor named the SS Gul Djemal, the name of the ship meant “Beautiful Rose.” On that ship, was my great-grandmother Rosa and her brother Eli; their father Isaac had arrived sometime earlier, all were Spanish speakers, all set sail from Turkey.

My family spoke the Spanish language because their ancestors had fled Spain in the late 15th century when the Spanish government committed one of the most heinous acts in history, the ethnic cleansing of the Jewish population of Spain through near-total displacement of its Jews. Although the Jews had existed in Spain prior to the invention of the Spanish language or even the arrival of Christianity, in 1492 they were subject to mass violations of human rights and were forced to flee–or as the Spanish government put it, they would “incur the penalty of death.”

In the end, hundreds of thousands of Jews fled Spain, leaving behind what would amount in today’s monetary system as billions of dollars in assets. These assets included private property such as homes, furnishings, jewelry, books, family objects, clothing, etc; and communal property such as businesses, real estate, synagogues, etc.

The only reason why I am able to sit here in 2007 and write this essay is because at the time when the Spanish government advised the Jews they would have to flee their homeland or face death, the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire–the leader of the state that existed before the modern Republic of Turkey–allowed my family and our people to seek refugee in his lands, this includes what is today Turkey, Greece, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Israel, the Balkans, and other places. Not only were the Jews allowed to go freely, but the Ottoman Empire sent ships to the west to assist the Spanish refugees in their terrible plight.

Sultan Mehemet stated: “Who among you of all my people that is with me, may his God he with him, let him ascend to Constantinople, the site of my royal throne. Let him dwell in the best of the land, each beneath his vine and fig tree, with silver and with gold, with wealth and cattle. Let him dwell in the land, trade in it, and take possession of it.”

When the most powerful nation in the world, 15th century Spain, openly and publicly threatened genocide against the Jewish people for the stated crime of practicing their own religion-Judaism, it was a Muslim government, the Ottoman Empire, which stepped in and saved the Jewish people from destruction. It was the Ottoman Empire that saved the Jews of Spain and to a great extent, Portugal, from certain death which the goverment threatened them with.

Unlike the Christian kingdoms of Spain and Portugal, the Ottoman Empire never had a system of government-sponsored hatred against the Jewish people. Even though Jews were dhimmis, the government of the Ottoman Empire never set in place specific targeted anti-Jewish policies such as those that existed in Christian Europe. It is a sad reality that today many people only remember the Ottoman Turks for alleged bad treatment of minorities, when clearly, they have done many positive things that we today hundreds of years later should continue to praise.

Source: Israel Insider Magazine, October 10, 2007

January 21, 2010
Live interview of Harun Yahya with the Israeli Delegation in Istanbul on Jan 19th, 2010

ADNAN OKTAR: Now let’s make an entrance speech. There’s an understanding of brotherhood in the Islamic way of thinking, Christian way of thinking and Jewish way of thinking. The aim for the coming of our guests is to reinforce this way of thinking, to put an end to the anarchy and terror in the world, accentuate the art, science, love, affection, compassion, friendship and to cause these values to come forward.

ADNAN OKTAR:. Atheists, those who do not believe in Allah, are in full collaboration and unity in the world. On the other hand, the majority of believers do not support each other, which is a quite erroneous attitude. It is very important for those who love Allah to support one another and be brothers with each other.

ADNAN OKTAR: Of course we’re not going to be enemies with the unbelievers. They’re also the servants of Allah. Sure, we also strive for them to be better but in democratic ways and with love and compassion, not with aggression and violence and also by respecting freedom of ideas and respecting freedom of thought. Each religion believes in its’ own rightfulness, which is quite normal. I mean when you say “People of the Book”, Christians and Jews come in mind. And besides, there are Muslims. Muslims surely think they’re on the right path, otherwise they would not be Muslims. But a Christian also believes he’s on the right path and that he’s going to go to heaven, or else he can’t be a Christian. And again a Jew believes he is on the right path and he will go to heaven, or else he can’t be a Jew. Then we understand all religions should respect each other, be compassionate towards each other, support and protect each other as the servants of Allah. It’s so reasonable and normal for each religion to consider itself as the true religion as long as there are no fights, uproar, wars, and suppression on the freedom of thought. In case these do not come about, everything is fine. At any rate Allah says in a verse “I made you into peoples”. Hence the Qur’an tells us this is reasonable and normal.

Atheism is the greatest problem in the world. I mean disbelief in Allah is the greatest problem. Darwinism and materialism is the biggest issue. Members of three religions should unite to struggle together against Darwinism, materialism and atheism on a scientific and rational basis and in a brotherly manner.

ADNAN OKTAR: Because Jews are being oppressed in many places. Peple have tried to oppress them at the time of Hitler, they tried to oppress them in Spain, and they tried to oppress them in their own lands. In the same way, people have tried to oppress Christians, Protestants, Orthodoxs in many places and they were made to suffer. The oppression towards Muslims is already well known worldwide. Look, so there’s a satanic trick being played here. The worldwide freemasonry is trying to get into a way by making Christians destroy Muslims, Muslims destroy Christians, Muslims destroy Jews, Jews destroy Muslims; making them enemies against each other and making them break each other up. It’s a tactic played by freemasonry, a satanic tactic. We’re going to abolish this game. We do not allow such a thing, those who love Allah will support each other, help each other and everyone will freely live their religion. And we will be respectful to every religion.

ADNAN OKTAR: Of course Jews will be ruled by the Jews. Needless to say Christians will be ruled by Christians and Muslims will be ruled by Muslims. This is what the Qur’an points out. In other words, the meaning of “do not take the Jews and Christians as patrons” is not to take them as rulers, which is normal. Of course everyone asks for those who share their beliefs to rule them. This is the meaning of it. Or else, as it’s written on the Books telling the life of Prophet Muhammad (saas), , Christians and Jews were shown mercy, love, attention, they were protected and supported at the times of our Prophet (saas), everybody knows this. Everybody knows how comfortable and peaceful the Christians and the Jews were in Fatih the Conquerer’s era. Besides, everyone knows how we sent for the Jews from Spain to here and how we provided them with opportunities and made them live in peace. Our ancestors implemented this beauty and this understanding of respect very well, we will be sustaining to implement this beauty.

ADNAN OKTAR: Thus, the ideology which thinks of bloodshed, violence, and making the believers destroy each other by pretending not to understand these issues, would be serving the system of antichrist and Satan. And thus, we would neither let Christians be atheists, materialists, Darwinists, nor the Jews to be atheists and materialists or our Muslim brothers to be atheists and materialists. Insha’Allah we will struggle decisively against disbelief in the world. It’s well-known in Israel that we don’t allow atheism in anyway and that we’re in an intensive effort about this issue. We are in a great effort to not let Darwinists and atheists to influence devout Christians. But of course it’s very important for everyone to be free in their own religions. I consider the efforts to make Israel and Turkey be unfriendly towards each other, futile. Israel is a country of the People of the Book, they’re the People of the Book. We never accept to have a tension or struggle with them. Just as we lived amicably at the times of our ancestors, we will live amicably now. This is the case with our Christian brothers also. They are also servants of Allah. They are also a community. We’ll approach them with compassion too.

ADNAN OKTAR: I mean we don’t become enemies with either Jews or the Christians because of a novel or a movie, or a theatre, and we don’t ever let that happen.

1 ) Mr. Japhet Tsedaka (Yefet Zadka) – Head of the Samaritan community

2 ) Mr. Mussa Hadi (Hurrian Dimitri) – Orthodox Christian leader

3 ) Rabbi Yeshayahu Hollander (From Sanhedrin the Rabbinical Court in Jerusalem, Jerusalem Court for Issues of Bnei Noah)

4 ) Mr. Ayoob Kara – The Deputy Minister of the Development of the Negev and Galilee (Deputy Minister Kara is the closest non Jewish person to the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and has a vision to develop a strong and warm relationship between Jews, Muslims, Christians and all other religions.)

5 ) Harun Yahya (Adnan Oktar)

6 ) Oktar Babuna

7 ) Sheikh Ameen Kablan (Abdul Amin Kabalan) – Deputy of the Druze community

8 ) Rabbi Ben Abrahamson (Historian & consultant to the Rabbinical Court of Jerusalem, Sanhedrin relating Islam religion)

9 ) Mr. Ataf Krinawi – Bedouin leader

19 JANUARY 2010

January 20, 2010
BTF Türk Kızlarının Eğitimi İçin facebook’ta

Anadolu’da bir kiz ogrenci yurdu yaptirma projesi

[19 January at 20:54

Haluk bey,

Bize yardim edebilir misiniz? Su asadaki mesaji Turkish Forum gruba uye olanlari yoliyabilirseniz, cok cok memnun oluruz.

Saygiler,
Lynn Eser

—

Degerli Arkadaslar,

Facebook üzerinde dünya çapinda yapilan ve 1 milyon dolar ödüllü yarismada Anadolu’da bir kiz ogrenci yurdu yaptirma projesi ile temsil ediliyoruz.

22 Ocak Cuma günü tamamlanacak olan yarismada sadece 1 dakikanizi ayirip asagidaki linkten oyunuzu kullanarak Türkiyemize destek olabilirsiniz.

Linke tikladik…tan sonra yapmaniz gerekenler;

* Chase uygulamasinin yüklenmesine izin verin.

* Chase sayfasi için “Become a fan” (Hayrani Ol) linkine tiklayin.

* “Vote for Charity” (Dernege Oy Ver) linkine tiklayin.

Oylama linki;

Daha detayli bilgi almak için;

Bu mesaji bütün arkadaslarinizla paylasabilirseniz seviniriz.

January 19, 2010
Turkey Claims Armenian ‘Preconditions’

Azerbaijan — Ahmet Davutoglu, foreign minister of Turkey, in Baku, 26May2009

19.01.2010

Tigran Avetisian

Turkey has accused Armenia of setting “unacceptable” preconditions for normalizing bilateral ties, citing the Armenian Constitutional Court’s interpretation of the ground-breaking agreements signed by the two estranged nations. (UPDATED)

Official Yerevan expressed on Tuesday its “bewilderment” with the claim, suggesting that the Turkish government might be seeking a new excuse to delay the parliamentary ratification of the agreements.

The court upheld on January 12 the legality of the two protocols that commit Ankara to establish diplomatic relations with Yerevan and open the Turkish-Armenian boarder. In an apparent response to domestic criticism of the deal, it also indicated that the documents can not have any bearing on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict or inhibit Armenia’s pursuit of greater international recognition of the Armenian genocide.

The ruling specifically mentioned Armenia’s 1990 declaration of independence from the Soviet Union that refers to the “genocide of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey and Western Armenia.” The opposition Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun), the most vocal detractor of the deal, has construed that as a de facto invalidation of key provisions of the protocols. The nationalist party wants the Armenian parliament to ratify them with corresponding “reservations.”

The Turkish Foreign Ministry offered late on Monday a similar interpretation of the Constitutional Court ruling. “It has been observed that this decision contains preconditions and restrictive provisions which impair the letter and spirit of the Protocols,” it said in a statement.

“The said decision undermines the very reason for negotiating these Protocols as well as their fundamental objective. This approach cannot be accepted on our part,” the ministry said without elaboration.

“Turkey, in line with its accustomed allegiance to its international commitments, maintains its adherence to the primary provisions of these Protocols. We expect the same allegiance from the Armenian Government,” added the statement.

Successive Turkish governments have longed portrayed the reference to “Western Armenia” as proof of Armenian claims to areas in eastern Turkey that were populated by many Armenians until their 1915-1918 mass killings and deportations. Dashnaktsutyun likewise believes that the 1990 declaration, which is mentioned in the Armenian constitution’s preamble, bars Yerevan from explicitly recognizing the existing Turkish-Armenian border.

Switzerland — Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu (2ndR) and his Armenian counterpart Eduard Nalbandiana (2nd L) shake hands as they hold signed documents after a signing ceremony, Zurich, 10Oct2009

In a written statement issued late on Tuesday, Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian said he will phone his Turkish counterpart, Ahmet Davutoglu, to “express my bewilderment and clarify where exactly Turkish side sees preconditions and just how the decision by Armenia’s Constitutional Court contradicts the fundamental objectives of the protocols.”

“I hope that with such a statement the Turkish side is not trying to justify its continuous attempts to set preconditions and disguise an undue stalling of the process of protocol ratification,” warned Nalbandian.

Armenia’s leadership has repeatedly accused the Turks of acting against the letter and spirit of the Turkish-Armenian agreements with statements linking their implementation to the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. President Serzh Sarkisian warned last month that Yerevan will walk away from the deal if Ankara fails to ratify it “within a reasonable time frame.”

https://www.azatutyun.am/a/1933524.html

January 19, 2010
How Gorbachev Contributed to the ‘Karabakhization’ of Azerbaijani Politics

Paul Goble

Vienna, January 19 – Twenty years ago this week, Mikhail Gorbachev sent troops into Azerbaijan to crush the popular front there, but what the Soviet president achieved by his actions was the further radicalization of Azerbaijan and the “Karabakhization” of Azerbaijani politics, a situation that continues to this day, according to a leading Moscow commentator.
In an article posted on the “Novaya politika” site yesterday, Sergey Markedonov says that the unwillingness of the Soviet government to force Armenia to return Karabakh to Azerbaijan and its dispatch of Soviet forces to Baku “became a transforming moment in the process of the national self-determination of Azerbaijan” (novopol.ru/text80474.html).
Both Moscow’s failure to defend the territorial integrity of the Azerbaijan SSR and the brutality of its forces in the Azerbaijani capital changed everything, Markedonov continues. Until then, Azerbaijan “had lacked a powerful dissident movement,” unlike Georgia or the Baltic states.
However, “the striving of the Kremlin to refrain from the adoption of a one-sided resolution of the ‘Karabakh question’ and the refusal of Moscow to fulfill its political contract to guarantee Azerbaijani territorial integrity pushed Baku onto the path of the search for national independence and sovereignty.”
And that drive, one based on a near universal popular consensus that Karabakh must be reintegrated into Azerbaijan, meant that nationalism rather than communism became the republic’s dominant ideology. Indeed, Markedonov says, it is possible to speak of “Karabakhization” as “the foundation” for Azerbaijan’s statehood.
In response to the Soviet invasion, 45,000 Azerbaijanis quit the ranks of the CPSU, and Heidar Aliyev, who had been forced from the Politburo, reemerged as a national leader by speaking to a meeting of Azerbaijanis and others at the permanent representation of his republic in Moscow,
For him and for all Azerbaijanis, Markedonov continues, “problem number one for independent Azerbaijan” was the question of the restoration of the territorial integrity of the country, because its military defeat by the Armenians had had such “a serious influence on the self-identification of Azerbaijanis.”
In the judgment of the Moscow analyst, “Heidar Aliyev’s return to Azerbaijani politics” allowed the country to overcome ethnic separatism at home from the Talysh, Lezgins, and Avars) and “also to minimize the threat [to predominantly Shiite Azerbaijan] from the side of radical Islam.”
After 1993, Markedonov says, “Baku easily dealt with both military risings and ‘rose revolutions,’ but “the main thing that Aliyev was able to achieve is an adequate assessment of the military and foreign policy resources of an independent Azerbaijan and on the basis of this assessment to form a sensible strategy.”
Aliyev recognized that using military force to resolve the problem was not a promising strategy and thus was willing to reach a ceasefire accord with Armenia, and he also understood, Markedonov says, that Baku needed to “overcome the unique diplomatic vacuum around the republic” by reaching out to all major powers and portraying Azerbaijan as “a civilized state.”
In recent years, many people have asked how long this “breathing space” and “concentration” can continue, Markedonov notes, but he argues that however emotionally powerful appeals to recover Karabakh may be, Azerbaijan would not profit from any use of military power anytime soon.
First of all, the Moscow specialist on the Caucasus says, “both Armenia and unrecognized Nagorno Karabakh are serious competitors,” something that dashes any hopes for “a blitzkrieg.” Second, the unsuccessful use of force could threaten the stability of political arrangements in Azerbaijan, as the case of Elchibey in the early 1990s shows.
And third, any military campaign “would create problems not only of a military but also of an informational-political character.” Overnight, such actions would “destroy the image of Azerbaijan, which has been carefully cultivated over the years, as a victim of ‘Armenian aggression.’”
Even if Baku were successful, it would not be forgiven, Markedonov argues, saying that Azerbaijanis should not see the Russian moves in Chechnya as a precedent. That is because, he continues, “what the world forgave Moscow for is something it would not forgive Baku.” Consequently, Azerbaijan’s only option, he concludes is to “wait and ‘concentrate.’”
But the passions ignited by the events of Black January and the centrality of the fate of Karabakh and the other occupied territories remain so great that it is perhaps no surprise that on this “round” anniversary, many Azerbaijanis are hoping against hope that the negotiations will lead to the recovery of their lands or seeking alternatives.
And one of the most interesting – and, following Markedonov’s argument, instructive — is the call by the Sheikh ul-Islam Pasha-Zade, the head of the Muslim Spiritual Directorate in Azerbaijan, for Gorbachev to be brought to trial in the Hague for his crimes against the Azerbaijani nation (www.interfax-religion.ru/islam/?act=news&div=33786).
That won’t happen, of course, but it is a reminder of the continuing sensitivity of the events of a generation ago in the Caucasus now, an impact that any who are seeking to address the problems there must not only acknowledge but also face up to, all the more now because these feelings have been allowed to fester so long.

http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/2010/01/window-on-eurasia-how-gorbachev.html

January 19, 2010