Posted on 09/03/2007 8:52:20 AM PDT by theothercheek
In the latest example of MSM groupthink, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and other major papers hailed the election of Abdullah Gul - a devout Muslim whose wife wears a headscarf – as president of Turkey "a victory for democracy" (in fact, both the WaPo and The Times used this very phrase).
So what if Gul was elected? So were Adolph Hitler and Hugo Chavez. "Democratic" elections do not ensure "a victory for democracy."
In a presumptuous editorial, The Times even goes so far to advise Turkey’s military, which has overthrown four governments (in 1960, 1971, 1980 and 1997), to "help the elected government to succeed - by staying out of politics." The Times adds:
Though nearly all of Turkey’s 70 million people identify themselves as Muslim, the Turkish Constitution calls for strict secularity in public life. The insistence on secularism, in place since the country’s founding in 1923, was intended to counter what were viewed as anti-modern strains within Islam that impeded development. …
Ataturk’s ultimate goal was for Turkey to become a Western-style democracy. And in such a democracy, the military exists to serve the government, not the other way around.
The generals, who treasure Turkey’s ties to the West as a member of NATO, have yet to grasp this …
Has anyone at The Times - or any other major U.S. paper - actually read the Turkish Constitution, which has been rewritten as many times as the military has overthrown the government (1921, 1924, 1961 and 1982)? The very Articles that define a Western-style democracy are contravened by several blatantly unconstitutional laws. Not only the Turkish judiciary has never invalidated or banned application of these laws – as obligated to under Article 9 – lower courts have applied them unhesitatingly to stifle or punish dissent.
For instance, Articles 26, 27 and 28 of the Turkish Constitution, which establish freedom of expression and guarantee freedom of the press, are negated by Turkish Penal Code Article 301 (which makes it a crime to "insult Turkishness" or to "insult Islam") and Article 305 (which makes it a crime to "promote" the Armenian Genocide as settled history).
Dozens of journalists, novelists and playwrights have been charged and, in some cases, prosecuted under Article 301 and/or Article 305. One of these was Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, who was repeatedly charged and prosecuted under Article 301 – and was convicted in October 2005.
And what about Article 10 (which prohibits discrimination based on "language, race, color, sex, political opinion, philosophical convictions or religious beliefs") and Article 12 (which guarantees "fundamental rights and freedoms", including right to life, security of person and right to property)? None of these protections seem to apply to Muslims who convert to Christianity. Turkish law treats converts as having renounced Turkishness – and they are routinely prosecuted and jailed for "insulting Islam."
And when Dink - who received numerous death threats from Nationalist sympathizers after his Article 301 conviction - appealed to the local magistrate for police protection, his pleas went unanswered. Turkish writers brought up on Article 301 charges received protection as soon as they asked for it. They are all alive today; Dink was gunned down in the street in front of his newspaper’s offices in January. So much for Article 10’s barring discrimination based on race, political opinion and philosophical conviction – to say nothing of Article 12’s guarantees of life and security of person.
One of the few papers to get it right is The Hartford Courant:
Abdullah Gul's election as president of Turkey will put to a test the contention that democracy and human rights are compatible with Islam. …
Turkey's attempts to join the European Union would come to naught if the government limits women's rights, abuses the rights of ethnic minorities and refuses to change anti-democratic laws that punish citizens for "crimes" under the umbrella of "insulting Turkishness."
One longstanding requisite for joining the European Union is for Turkey's government to acknowledge that its imperial Ottoman predecessor waged a genocidal war against Armenians.
In practice, Turkey’s Constitution is not worth the paper it is printed on when it comes to guaranteeing a secular, pluralistic and democratic government for its non-Muslim minority population. As the judiciary has not been inclined to rein in Nationalists – even after Dink’s murder, which involved a conspiracy that included the police chief of the town of Trabzon – there is little hope that Islamism will be checked by the courts.
The Times has "yet to grasp" the vital role the military plays in stepping in when all other government institutions fail. True, Turkey will never be a Western-style democracy – but at least it won’t become another Islamic republic.
Note: The Stiletto writes about politics and other stuff at The Stiletto Blog.
Blogs are sometimes more informative and better researched than media organizions with massive budgets. Here is proof
Yup. And I am grateful a site like Free Republic allows us to share stuff like this.
Is Irak, a country that was liberated by the US a western style democracy? Is Afghanistan, a country that was liberated by the US a western style democracy? The “nation building” if we orientate ourselves on existing “western style democracies” in that area was not very successfull so far. All pre-war estimations about the learning aptitude of Muslums in Iraq and Afghanistan were wrong and what should have turned out as a example of freedom is a death-trap of collective cretinism in the meantime.
We should be happy that the Turks found a way to canalize their weird religion into privacy trough a quite secular system. It is for sure not perfect and far from our standarts, but Turkey provides a quite free platform to live in the ME. Together with Israel it is de facto the only place there where the individual has some rights. Therefore I think Turkey could be the example for other muslim nations. I doubt that we westerners will overcome this false religion. Arabs, Persians and Turks will continue to believe into their weird and funny Mohammad or whatever is his name. Therefore we have to look for secular gouvernment systems we can deal with. It is indeed possible to deal with Turkey but it is de facto impossible to deal with theocratic Irak or Afghanistan in the long turn. Not to speak about Iran, Syria, Pakistan etc. etc. pp.
This is something that should be understood soon.
P.S.
I do not care about headscarfs or other muslum BS as long as it happens in privacy.
The headscarves are a public manifestation of Islamofascism. Turkey’s religious repression happens in private. Coverts from Islam are jailed (and in some cases brutally murdered, as those bible publishing company employees earlier this year); three Catholic prists have been murdered (one while he was knelt in prayer) because many Turks believe that Christian charity is given for the purpose of buying conversions; Armenian and Greek Christians are not allowed to build, own and maintain churches (and in many areas of Turkey Armenians must hide their identities by worshipping a t mosques). This is your idea of a democracy?
It might be a tragedy, but simply have a look to America's number one ally in the area: Saudi Arabia
I hope you understand that the situation in a relatively free muslim nation like Turkey can not be compared with other countries in that region. BTW - the US failed completely to establish secualar gouvernments in the ME-countries they invaded. Just try to open a church in Kabul. ;)
Therefore it is complete affectation to ignore the way of Turkey as a example for other muslim nations in that region.
P.S. The murderers of the priests have been punished and are jailed.
I hear they celebrated the win in Greece with a big ole bonfire.
“Relatively” is relative when you’re Armenian, Greek or Kurdish. Democracy is like pregnancy - you can’t be a little democratic, just like you can’t be a little pregant. You is or you ain’t.
You’re not the only one who has made this observation, believe you me. Where there’s smoke, there’s fire ...
Democracy and Islam are simply not compatible. Therefore it is in the interest of the western world and the ruled muslims to look for other systems that provide a possible maximum of freedom and security. Since Turkey has such a system, it is a comparatively stable entity that tries to stay close to the west.
As I already said - a positive example for the rest of the ME.
If Realpolitik means that Christians and Jews who live in Muslim “democracies” have to live in fear of their lives, that’s not good enough. You want Realpolitik? Switch our military facilities to any one of the Baltic States (Christian countries will be more reliable allies in the protracted war against Islamofascistic terrorism than Muslim Turkey). The Turks are duplicitous allies at best - and as Muslims, they always have been and always will be dupicitous. In WWII, they were supposedly “neutral” but were supplying Hitler’s war machine with chromium. I don’t trust them and would be very happy if we cut off our dealings with them.
Allies like the Balts are fine, their problem is their complete irrelevance. Since the ME is still our oil reservoir and Israel is still located in that region it will be impossible to ignore Islam now and in the future. Due to the fact that it is impossible to wipe away the devotees of the so called Mohammed completely we have to deal with them. This is the reason why I think that the Turkish system is not that bad. It is simply the best best choice in a pool of badness.
I guess you don’t know Christians and Armenians who live in Turkey. I do. It’s that bad - and worse.
I do. My uncle is married to a Armenian women (she is the grandchild) in Paris who lost large parts of her family during the genocide in 1915. The 3 women and one man that were left of her once big family came over Greece to France.
As I already said - I understand the hate towards the Turks very well. The thing is that I am looking for practical solutions. Islam is a fact that we can not reverse. Those guys believe into their so called Allah and Mohammed BS. Therefore they will dance around their totems in Mekka today and in the future. No matter if we like it or not. We should accept this fact just like other ethic groups in New Guinea dance around their totems. It does not make any sense to change this.
There are 3 possible solutions:
1. We have to kill all muslims.
2. We have to look for suitable gouvernmental systems to keep the threat under control.
3. We have to convince all Muslims of Christianity.
Since I am no mass murderer I prefer the second suggestion. It is obvious that the third suggestion is desirable but unrealistic. Because a “pure” democracy is not suitable to this cult, I still think that the Turkish system is the example for the muslim world how to deal with their leadership. Relatively stable and free.
I do not know any Armenian Genocide survivors. I know Armenians who are living in Istanbul today. They are second class citizens. They are required to serve in the Army, but never as officers. In school, they are required to swear an oath every morning that they are “happy to be Turks.” They are living in dhimmitude, plain and simple. That is not my idea of democracy.
The only way Turkey will ever find its way towards democracy is to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, to end the enmity once and for all. Once this issue is neutralized, the two people can live in the same country in peace. Once there is peace, there will be equality. Once there is equality there will be democracy. This is a far more plausible solution than any you came up with (i.e., converting them all). The Turks just need to take that first step.
The crux is that in a muslim country it is impossible for a Christian not to live in dhimmitude. This is the character of this religion and has nothing to do with Turkey. Islam is agressive and intolerant. Therefore your suggestions (although they would be the best solutions of course) about equality are wishful and unrealistic thinking.
P.S.
American politicians had the same wrong idealistic premises like you when they once thought that they would be able to bring democracy into such countries like Iraq or Afghanistan in 2003. Simply impossible.
Personally I know lots of Turks and like them as reliable people.
Many Americans are obviously not aware that American millitary facilities are not wanted everywhere because they always mean a loss of sovereignty for the host countries. I.e. more than 80% of the Germans including the German gouvernment were against the Iraq war but German soil was and is used as "the" base for this war. Most Germans i.e. therefore would be happy if the American presence could be reduced since Germany itself has no strategical need for it anymore. It is rather a problem for Germany since it restricts the German foreign policy to a pro-American course and poses the danger of hostile activities on German soil although Germany usually has nothing to do with American actions. If Germany would say "no" NATO and the trans-atlantic relationship would be death.
Most eastern Europeans (maybe except of the Romanians) are well aware of this fact and prefer to be left alone (small troop deployments are welcome but no big contingents). The Balts are in a spechial situation since they still fear the massive threat of Russia. Nevertheless it would not make any sense to relocate too much American troops there for strategical reasons.
Yes, the can be relied upon to deny the Armenian Genocide.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.