Promoting Islamophobia

[Dogmaphobe]

But such a thing as free speech does not exist in Muslim countries. Never did, and never will.

and if those who despise liberalism like Coyote and Toxic have their way, it will cease to exist here as well.

This entire "islamophobia" nonsense is just a ruse they use to try to move the west towards the same place as Islamic countries when it comes to the inviolate nature of this totalitarian ideology. The blasphemy and apostasy laws in place in all those Islamic countries aren't enough for them, since they are trying to influence discourse to make it so here, as well.

 

[irosie91]

from what I have read-----"ataturk" has become a dirty word
in some circles in Turkey------and he has been assigned
the MOST ODIOUS LIBEL -------he was a jooo in disguise.

I predict utter cesspoolness for Turkey------roudy----you
quoted my hubby-----"I will never set foot in a muslim country"
sheeeesh-----and I really wanted to see Aden and dem dar
PYRAMIDS-----before they get knocked out of existence

I won't, anybody who's lived as a minority among Muslims and had to leave will tell you the same. I get a lot of propositions to go to Turkey or Jordan (to see Petra) for vacations. Especially Turkey, I heard its beautiful. But...After what I and my family have experienced in Muslim countries, over and over. I won't set foot. Those societies simply cannot be trusted, people just don't understand the barbarism they are capable of.

Now, now----roudy---be nice and 'muslim' and 'Emily'
will describe the 'beauty of islam" and its wonderful
"constitutional" protection of the right of all mankind.
Hubby often runs into people from his country of birth and
they like to remind him how HAPPY jews were living under the glorious system of utterly delightful dhimmia

 

[Coyote]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

 

[irosie91]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

you make a point that interests me Coyote. You accused
Dog of hating muslims without having met one. Long ago--
when I was young (and beautiful) ----I met LOTS AND LOTS of muslims----together with lots of other people from India, Pakistan Iran even Ceylon (well it WAS Ceylon)------of
those people-----the ones who really really hated jews----
were the muslims who never met a jew.. Hindus, Sikhs, etc etc did not hate jews-------some even had jewish friends---
usually in Bombay------but muslims from the northern parts
of India and from Pakistan (the Ceylon people I knew were
Buddhist and hindu) REALLY HATED JEWS. It worked out
ok------they seemed to assume I am Christian-----that's how
I found out how much they hated jews-------they expected me
to share the opinion-------so I played along----sometimes.
One poor young Opthamologist from Pakistan was HORRIFIED at my claim to be a jew----he insisted
"IT's NOT TRUE"
As to dog------what makes you think he hates "all muslims"-----did he ever say that? Did he say just being born a muslim
is like proof of corruption like so many people say of jews-----
the ones I correctly call islamo nazis

 

[toxicmedia]

I'm tempted to deny you the answers to your questions, because of the deprivation you bestow on mine.

But I'm reassured about your sanity if your goals are simply "awareness"

And honestly...that region could use more cool heads.

As for free speech. It's actually alive and well within our exchange. You've expressed your opinions, and backed them up with why you have them. I have rejected them, and your sources, and expressed my opinions. Then you rejected my opinions, and so on.

As for converting to Islam, once when I was in love...I asked the local Sunni preacher, as I called him, if it would benefit my wife to covert. He said my reasons were wrong, and advised against it. He was probably right, because we got divorced in the US 5 years later. She now lives with a conservative redneck in Texas...go figure.

But such a thing as free speech does not exist in Muslim countries. Never did, and never will.

And again, you are talking about Turkey, a secular country which at some point in recent history banned Islamism to the point that even it's official language was changed to Latin / Greek. Now of course, it's taken a turn for the much worse with this new leadership. What I'm saying is the act of a Christian man marrying a Muslim woman without first converting to Islam, is punishable by death in many Muslim countries. I'm wondering how even in Turkey, you guys were issued a marriage certificate. Perhaps you married in US.

There is no such thing as a cool head when it comes to Muslims (generally speaking). There is a certain capacity for rational thought and reason, which for some reason or another Islam seems to wipe out of the human brain. Having been around Muslims I know this to be a fact. Why do you think there seems to be an endless amount of people in the Muslim world willing to put on a suicide vest and go blow themselves up? Picture the act and then ask yourself, is it poverty, education, or is it the degree of the grievance? You have people under worse conditions that never did the kinds of horrific things Muslims do. The answer can be one thing and one thing alone: it's the ideology. Let's be honest and call a spade a spade.

I don't know who you're hearing what you're hearing about Turkey from...but my experience was different, because I was there.

Neither Islam nor Christianity is banned in Turkey, and nobody is proposing either.

Marrying a Muslim woman without being a Muslim, in Turkey, Iraq, and Syria, is not punishable at all. We did raise some eyebrows but we carried around our marriage license, and when we would check into hotels all around the region (NOT JUST TURKEY) that license would put the managers at ease. They were mostly concerned that she was a hooker.

We were married in a civil ceremony because the Mosque wouldn't do it. Kind of like how rednecks won't marry gays in churches over here.

There are tons of cool heads all over the middle east, and most people have them.

My take.....the people in the middle east who are ass holes, would probably have been ass holes if they were Christians or whatever else.

Has it ever occurred to you that the evil of Islam which we should resist are the efforts to make America like the Middle East?

Once the entire country is 50% or greater Islamic things here will be more like what you experienced.

But the spear point of the Islamic Jihad, where they are confronting non-Muslim cultures and societies and forcing their will on others, that is where your focus should be.

No, that is paranoid, and it'll never happen

Muslim or Dhimmi or not, it is already happening below our radars.

Let me know when they're "on the radar", and we'll drone them to death, then nuke em' if that doesn't work

Untill then, freak out all you want

 

[toxicmedia]

What do you want done about it?

Two different questions, dipstick. No one's going to change the world here. This is an OPINION board.

Perhaps you should consider that putting Western values and tolerance to Muslim societies on the same level is a total fraud. You seem to have a problem with free speech, are you sure you didn't convert to Islam? LOL

I'm tempted to deny you the answers to your questions, because of the deprivation you bestow on mine.

But I'm reassured about your sanity if your goals are simply "awareness"

And honestly...that region could use more cool heads.

As for free speech. It's actually alive and well within our exchange. You've expressed your opinions, and backed them up with why you have them. I have rejected them, and your sources, and expressed my opinions. Then you rejected my opinions, and so on.

As for converting to Islam, once when I was in love...I asked the local Sunni preacher, as I called him, if it would benefit my wife to covert. He said my reasons were wrong, and advised against it. He was probably right, because we got divorced in the US 5 years later. She now lives with a conservative redneck in Texas...go figure.

But such a thing as free speech does not exist in Muslim countries. Never did, and never will.

And again, you are talking about Turkey, a secular country which at some point in recent history banned Islamism to the point that even it's official language was changed to Latin / Greek. Now of course, it's taken a turn for the much worse with this new leadership. What I'm saying is the act of a Christian man marrying a Muslim woman without first converting to Islam, is punishable by death in many Muslim countries. I'm wondering how even in Turkey, you guys were issued a marriage certificate. Perhaps you married in US.

There is no such thing as a cool head when it comes to Muslims (generally speaking). There is a certain capacity for rational thought and reason, which for some reason or another Islam seems to wipe out of the human brain. Having been around Muslims I know this to be a fact. Why do you think there seems to be an endless amount of people in the Muslim world willing to put on a suicide vest and go blow themselves up? Picture the act and then ask yourself, is it poverty, education, or is it the degree of the grievance? You have people under worse conditions that never did the kinds of horrific things Muslims do. The answer can be one thing and one thing alone: it's the ideology. Let's be honest and call a spade a spade.

I don't know who you're hearing what you're hearing about Turkey from...but my experience was different, because I was there.

Neither Islam nor Christianity is banned in Turkey, and nobody is proposing either.

Marrying a Muslim woman without being a Muslim, in Turkey, Iraq, and Syria, is not punishable at all. We did raise some eyebrows but we carried around our marriage license, and when we would check into hotels all around the region (NOT JUST TURKEY) that license would put the managers at ease. They were mostly concerned that she was a hooker.

We were married in a civil ceremony because the Mosque wouldn't do it. Kind of like how rednecks won't marry gays in churches over here.

There are tons of cool heads all over the middle east, and most people have them.

My take.....the people in the middle east who are ass holes, would probably have been ass holes if they were Christians or whatever else.

Like I said a Turkey was and probably is different. I have not been there but have studied enough. Many of my friends and family have been there for vacation. Heard its beautiful, but I'm not setting foot in any Muslim country ever again. Have you read about Turkey's history? This is the reason a non Muslim can marry a Muslim. Unfortunately many of the reforms have been reversed. Read this and ask yourself, why did a Muslim nation ABOLISH Islam from its national psyche? Perhaps FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE? The Shah of Iran and his father were very similar rulers before the Islamist animals took over and destroyed the country:

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (pronounced [mustäˈfä ceˈmäl äˈtäˌtyɾc]; 19 May 1881 (conventional) – 10 November 1938) was aTurkish army officer, reformist statesman, and the first President of Turkey. He is credited with being the founder of theRepublic of Turkey. His surname, Atatürk (meaning "Father of the Turks"), was granted to him in 1934 and forbidden to any other person by the Turkish parliament.[1]

Atatürk was a military officer during World War I.[2] Following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, he led theTurkish National Movement in the Turkish War of Independence. Having established a provisional government in Ankara, he defeated the forces sent by the Allies. His military campaigns led to victory in the Turkish War of Independence. Atatürk then embarked upon a program of political, economic, and cultural reforms, seeking to transform the former Ottoman Empire into a modern and secular nation-state. Under his leadership, thousands of new schools were built, primary education was made free and compulsory, and women were given equal civil and political rights, while the burden of taxation on peasants was reduced.[3] His government also carried out an extensive policy of Turkification.[4][5][6][7] The principles of Atatürk's reforms, upon which modern Turkey was established, are referred to as Kemalism.

Domestic policies
Mustafa Kemal's basic tenet was the complete independence of the country.[63] He clarified his position:

“ ...by complete independence, we mean of course complete economic, financial, juridical, military, cultural independence and freedom in all matters. Being deprived of independence in any of these is equivalent to the nation and country being deprived of all its independence.[64] ”
He led wide-ranging reforms in social, cultural, and economical aspects, establishing the new Republic's backbone of legislative, judicial, and economic structures. Though he was later idealized by some as an originator of sweeping reforms, many of his reformist ideas were already common in Ottoman intellectual circles at the turn of the 20th century, and were expressed more openly after the Young Turk Revolution.[65]

Mustafa Kemal created a banner to mark the changes between the old Ottoman and the new republican rule. Each change was symbolized as an arrow in this banner. This defining ideology of the Republic of Turkey is referred to as the "Six Arrows", or Kemalist ideology. Kemalist ideology is based on Mustafa Kemal's conception of realism and pragmatism.[66] The fundamentals of nationalism, populism and etatism were all defined under the Six Arrows. These fundamentals were not new in world politics or, indeed, among the elite of Turkey. What made them unique was that these interrelated fundamentals were formulated specifically for Turkey's needs. A good example is the definition and application of secularism; the Kemalist secular state significantly differed from predominantly Christian states.

Civic independence and the Caliphate, 1924–1925

Abolition of the Caliphate was an important dimension in Mustafa Kemal's drive to reform the political system and to promote the national sovereignty. By the consensus of the Muslim majority in early centuries, the caliphate was the core political concept of Sunni Islam.[72] Abolishing the sultanate was easier because the survival of the Caliphate at the time satisfied the partisans of the sultanate. This produced a split system with the new republic on one side and an Islamic form of government with the Caliph on the other side, and Mustafa Kemal and İnönü worried that "it nourished the expectations that the sovereign would return under the guise of Caliph."[73] Caliph Abdülmecid II was elected after the abolition of the sultanate (1922).

The caliph had his own personal treasury and also had a personal service that included military personnel; Mustafa Kemal said that there was no "religious" or "political" justification for this. He believed that Caliph Abdülmecid II was following in the steps of the sultans in domestic and foreign affairs: accepting of and responding to foreign representatives and reserve officers, and participating in official ceremonies and celebrations.[74] He wanted to integrate the powers of the caliphate into the powers of the GNA. His initial activities began on 1 January 1924, when[74] İnönü, Çakmak and Özalp consented to the abolition of the caliphate. The caliph made a statement to the effect that he would not interfere with political affairs.[75] On 1 March 1924, at the Assembly, Mustafa Kemal said

“ The religion of Islam will be elevated if it will cease to be a political instrument, as had been the case in the past.[76] ”
On 3 March 1924, the caliphate was officially abolished and its powers within Turkey were transferred to the GNA. Other Muslim nations debated the validity of Turkey's unilateral abolition of the caliphate as they decided whether they should confirm the Turkish action or appoint a new caliph.[75] A "Caliphate Conference" was held in Cairo in May 1926 and a resolution was passed declaring the caliphate "a necessity in Islam", but failed to implement this decision.[75]

Two other Islamic conferences were held in Mecca (1926) and Jerusalem (1931), but failed to reach a consensus.[75] Turkey did not accept the re-establishment of the caliphate and perceived it as an attack to its basic existence; while Mustafa Kemal and the reformists continued their own way.[77]

On 8 April 1924, sharia courts were abolished with the law "Mehakim-i Şer'iyenin İlgasına ve Mehakim Teşkilatına Ait Ahkamı Muaddil Kanun".[65][78]

The removal of the caliphate was followed by an extensive effort to establish the separation of governmental and religious affairs. Education was the cornerstone in this effort. In 1923, there were three main educational groups of institutions. The most common institutions were medreses based on Arabic, the Qur'an and memorization. The second type of institution was idadî and sultanî, the reformist schools of the Tanzimat era. The last group included colleges and minority schools in foreign languages that used the latest teaching models in educating pupils. The old medrese education was modernized.[79] Mustafa Kemal changed the classical Islamic education for a vigorously promoted reconstruction of educational institutions.[79]Mustafa Kemal linked educational reform to the liberation of the nation from dogma, which he believed was more important than the Turkish War of Independence.

“ Today, our most important and most productive task is the national education [unification and modernization] affairs. We have to be successful in national education affairs and we shall be. The liberation of a nation is only achieved through this way."[80] ”
In the summer of 1924, Mustafa Kemal invited American educational reformer John Dewey to Ankara to advise him on how to reform Turkish education.[79] His public education reforms aimed to prepare citizens for roles in public life through increasing the public literacy. He wanted to institute compulsory primary education for both girls and boys; since then this effort has been an ongoing task for the republic. He pointed out that one of the main targets of education in Turkey had to be raising a generation nourished with what he called the "public culture". The state schools established a common curriculum which became known as the "unification of education."

Unification of education was put into force on 3 March 1924 by the Law on Unification of Education (No. 430). With the new law, education became inclusive, organized on a model of the civil community. In this new design, all schools submitted their curriculum to the "Ministry of National Education", a government agency modelled after other countries' ministries of education. Concurrently, the republic abolished the two ministries and made clergy subordinate to the department of religious affairs, one of the foundations of secularism in Turkey. The unification of education under one curriculum ended "clerics or clergy of the Ottoman Empire", but was not the end of religious schools in Turkey; they were moved to higher education until later governments restored them to their former position in secondary after Mustafa Kemal's death.


Atatürk with his Panama hat just afterthe Kastamonu speech in 1925.
Beginning in the fall of 1925, Mustafa Kemal encouraged the Turks to wear modern European attire.[81] He was determined to force the abandonment of the sartorial traditions of the Middle East and finalize a series of dress reforms, which were originally started byMahmud II.[81] The fez was established by Sultan Mahmud II in 1826 as part of the Ottoman Empire's modernization effort. The Hat Law of 1925 introduced the use of Western-style hats instead of the fez. Mustafa Kemal first made the hat compulsory for civil servants.[81] The guidelines for the proper dressing of students and state employees were passed during his lifetime; many civil servants adopted the hat willingly. In 1925, Mustafa Kemal wore his "Panama hat" during a public appearance in Kastamonu, one of the most conservative towns in Anatolia, to explain that the hat was the headgear of civilized nations. The last part of reform on dress emphasized the need to wear modern Western suits with neckties as well as Fedora and Derby-style hats instead of antiquated religion-based clothing such as the veil and turban in the Law Relating to Prohibited Garments of 1934.

Even though he personally promoted modern dress for women, Mustafa Kemal never made specific reference to women's clothing in the law, as he believed that women would adapt to the new clothing styles of their own free will. He was frequently photographed on public business with his wife Lâtife Uşaklıgil, who covered her head in accordance with Islamic tradition. He was also frequently photographed on public business with women wearing modern Western clothes. But it was Atatürk's adopted daughters, Sabiha Gökçen and Afet İnan, who provided the real role model for the Turkish women of the future. He wrote: "The religious covering of women will not cause difficulty ... This simple style [of headcovering] is not in conflict with the morals and manners of our society."[82]

On 30 August 1925, Mustafa Kemal's view on religious insignia used outside places of worship was introduced in hisKastamonu speech. This speech also had another position. He said:

“ In the face of knowledge, science, and of the whole extent of radiant civilization, I cannot accept the presence in Turkey's civilized community of people primitive enough to seek material and spiritual benefits in the guidance of sheiks. The Turkish republic cannot be a country of sheiks, dervishes, and disciples. The best, the truest order is the order of civilization. To be a man it is enough to carry out the requirements of civilization. The leaders of dervish orders will understand the truth of my words, and will themselves close down their lodges [tekke] and admit that their disciplines have grown up.[63] ”
On 2 September the government issued a decree closing down all Sufi orders and the tekkes. Mustafa Kemal ordered their dervish lodges to be converted to museums, such as Mevlana Museum in Konya. The institutional expression of Sufism became illegal in Turkey; a politically neutral form of Sufism, functioning as social associations, was permitted to exist.[citation needed]

The abolition of the caliphate and other cultural reforms were met with fierce opposition. [75]

Modernization efforts, 1926–1930

President Kemal at the 1927 opening of the State Art and Sculpture Museum.

President Mustafa Kemal Atatürk introducing the new Turkish alphabet to the people of Kayseri on 20 September 1928.

Present Mustafa Kemal Atatürk at the library of the Çankaya Presidential Residence in Ankara, 1929.

Attending a class at the Law School of theIstanbul Darülfünunu in 1930.
In the years following 1926, Mustafa Kemal introduced a radical departure from previous reformations established by the Ottoman Empire.[88] For the first time in history, Islamic law was separated from secular law, and restricted to matters of religion.[88] Mustafa Kemal said

“ We must liberate our concepts of justice, our laws and our legal institutions from the bonds which, even though they are incompatible with the needs of our century, still hold a tight grip on us.[89] ”
On 1 March 1926, the Turkish penal code was passed. It was modelled after the Italian Penal Code. On 4 October 1926, Islamic courts were closed. Establishing the civic law needed time, so Mustafa Kemal delayed the inclusion of the principle of laïcité until 5 February 1937.

Ottoman practice discouraged social interaction between men and women in keeping with Islamic practice of sex segregation. Mustafa Kemal began developing social reforms very early, as was evident in his personal journal. He and his staff discussed issues like abolishing the veiling of womenand the integration of women into the outside world. The clue on how he was planning to tackle the issue was stated in his journal on November 1915;

“ The social change can come by (1) educating capable mothers who are knowledgeable about life; (2) giving freedom to women; (3) a man can change his morals, thoughts, and feelings by leading a common life with a woman; as there is an inborn tendency towards the attraction of mutual affection.[90] ”
Mustafa Kemal needed a new civil code to establish his second major step of giving freedom to women. The first part was the education of girls and was established with the unification of education. On 4 October 1926, the new Turkish civil code passed. It was modelled after the Swiss Civil Code. Under the new code, women gained equality with men in such matters as inheritance and divorce. Mustafa Kemal did not consider gender a factor in social organization. According to his view, society marched towards its goal with men and women united. He believed that it was scientifically impossible for him to achieve progress and to become civilized if the gender separation continued as in Ottoman times.[91] During a meeting he declaimed:

“ To the women: Win for us the battle of education and you will do yet more for your country than we have been able to do. It is to you that I appeal.
To the men: If henceforward the women do not share in the social life of the nation, we shall never attain to our full development. We shall remain irremediably backward, incapable of treating on equal terms with the civilizations of the West.[92] ”
In 1927, the State Art and Sculpture Museum (Turkish: Ankara Resim ve Heykel Müzesi) opened its doors. The museum highlighted sculpture, which was little practised in Turkey owing to the Islamic tradition of avoiding idolatry. Mustafa Kemal believed that "culture is the foundation of the Turkish Republic."[93] and described modern Turkey's ideological thrust as "a creation of patriotism blended with a lofty humanist ideal." He included both his own nation's creative legacy and what he saw as the admirable values of global civilization. The pre-Islamic culture of the Turks became the subject of extensive research, and particular emphasis was laid upon Turkish culture widespread before the Seljuk and Ottoman civilizations. He instigated study of Anatolian civilizations--Phrygians and Lydians, Sumerians and Hittites. To attract current public attention to past cultures, he personally named the "Sümerbank" (1932) after the Sumerians, and the "Etibank" (1935) after the Hittites. He also stressed the folk arts of the countryside as a wellspring of Turkish creativity.

In the spring of 1928, Mustafa Kemal met in Ankara with several linguists and professors from all over Turkey where he unveiled to them a plan of his to implement a new alphabet for the written Turkish language based on a modified Latin alphabet. The new Turkish alphabet would serve as a replacement for the old Arabic script and as a solution to the literacy problem in Turkey. When he asked them how long it would take to implement the new alphabet into the Turkish language, most of the professors and linguists said between three to five years. Mustafa Kemal was said to have scoffed and openly stated, "we shall do it in three to five months".[citation needed]

Over the next several months, Mustafa Kemal pressed for the introduction of the new Turkish alphabet as well as made public announcements to the upcoming overhaul of the new alphabet. On 1 November 1928 he introduced the new Turkish alphabet and abolished the use of Arabic script. At the time, literate citizens of the country comprised as little as 10% of the population. Dewey noted to Mustafa Kemal that learning how to read and write in Turkish with the Arabic script took roughly three years with rather strenuous methods at the elementary level.[79] They used the Ottoman Language written in the Arabic script with Arabic and Persian loan vocabulary.[79] The creation of the new Turkish alphabet as a variant of the Latin alphabet was undertaken by the Language Commission (Turkish: Dil Encümeni) with the initiative of Mustafa Kemal.[79] The tutelage was received from an Ottoman-Armenian calligrapher Hagop Dilaçar.[94] The first Turkish newspaper using the new alphabet was published on 15 December 1928. Mustafa Kemal himself travelled the countryside in order to teach citizens the new alphabet. As he predicted, the country's adaptation to the new alphabet was very quick, and literacy in Turkey jumped from 10% to over 70% within two years.[citation needed] Beginning in 1932, the People's Houses (Turkish: Halk Evleri) opened throughout the country in order to meet the requirement that people between the ages of four and 40 were required to learn the new alphabet as mandated. There were congresses for discussing the issues of copyright, public education and scientific publishing. Literacy reform was also supported by strengthening the private publishing sector with a new law on copyrights.

Mustafa Kemal promoted modern teaching methods at the primary education level, and Dewey took a place of honour.[79]Dewey presented a paradigmatic set of recommendations designed for developing societies that are moving towards modernity in his "Report and Recommendation for the Turkish educational system."[79] He was interested in adult educationfor the goal of forming a skill base in the country. Turkish women were taught not only child care, dress-making and household management, but also skills needed to join the economy outside the home. Turkish education became a state-supervised system, which was designed to create a skill base for the social and economic progress of the country.[95] His "unified" education program was designed to educate responsible citizens as well as useful and appreciated members of society.[79] Turkish education became an integrative system, aimed to alleviate poverty and used female education to establish gender equality.

Mustafa Kemal generated media attention to propagate modern education during this period. He instigated official education meetings called "Science Boards" and "Education Summits." to discuss the quality of education, training issues and certain basic educational principles. He said, "our schools [curriculum] should aim to provide opportunities for all pupils to learn and to achieve." He was personally engaged with the development of two textbooks. The first one was Turkish: Vatandaş İçin Medeni Bilgiler (1930). The second, Geometry (1937), was a text for high schools. The Vatandaş İçin Medeni Bilgiler (Civic knowledge for the citizens) introduced the science of comparative government and explained the means of administering public trust by explaining the rules of governance as applied to the new state institutions.

On 5 December 1934, Turkey moved to grant full political rights to women, before several other European nations. The equal rights of women in marriage had already been established in the earlier Turkish civil code.[109] Women's place in Mustafa Kemal's cultural reforms was best expressed in the civic book prepared under his supervision.[110] Mustafa Kemal said that

“ There is no logical explanation for the political disenfranchisement of women. Any hesitation and negative mentality on this subject is nothing more than a fading social phenomenon of the past. ...Women must have the right to vote and to be elected; because democracy dictates that, because there are interests that women must defend, and because there are social duties that women must perform.[111]

Thank you....you just proved to me you're crazy

 

[Coyote]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

you make a point that interests me Coyote. You accused
Dog of hating muslims without having met one. Long ago--
when I was young (and beautiful) ----I met LOTS AND LOTS of muslims----together with lots of other people from India, Pakistan Iran even Ceylon (well it WAS Ceylon)------of
those people-----the ones who really really hated jews----
were the muslims who never met a jew.. Hindus, Sikhs, etc etc did not hate jews-------some even had jewish friends---
usually in Bombay------but muslims from the northern parts
of India and from Pakistan (the Ceylon people I knew were
Buddhist and hindu) REALLY HATED JEWS. It worked out
ok------they seemed to assume I am Christian-----that's how
I found out how much they hated jews-------they expected me
to share the opinion-------so I played along----sometimes.
One poor young Opthamologist from Pakistan was HORRIFIED at my claim to be a jew----he insisted
"IT's NOT TRUE"
As to dog------what makes you think he hates "all muslims"-----did he ever say that? Did he say just being born a muslim
is like proof of corruption like so many people say of jews-----
the ones I correctly call islamo nazis

When people have never met "the other" it's easy to believe they aren't like other people and to believe in conspiracy theories and fear mongering. The danger in actually meeting them and talking with them is that you might realize that they are just like other people - just as good, bad, pig-headed, ignorant, educated, smart, stupid....

Look at how the level of anti-semitism and wide spread acceptance of conspiracy theories has risen among the Palestinians. With increased seperation over the years many have never met a Jew.

As far as India - antisemitism among India's Hindus is around 18% - .not a miniscule number.

As far as Dogma's views to Muslims - I have yet to see a single post from him that doesn't totally villafy them as a whole - without distinction. What other conclusion can be drawn?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

Living in the west as you now are, you must find it frustrating to be limited to calling somebody a racist bigot for opposing your agenda. I imagine you must long for the day when your numbers have increased sufficiently to get a right, proper fatwa issued to take care of your problem.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

you make a point that interests me Coyote. You accused
Dog of hating muslims without having met one. Long ago--
when I was young (and beautiful) ----I met LOTS AND LOTS of muslims----together with lots of other people from India, Pakistan Iran even Ceylon (well it WAS Ceylon)------of
those people-----the ones who really really hated jews----
were the muslims who never met a jew.. Hindus, Sikhs, etc etc did not hate jews-------some even had jewish friends---
usually in Bombay------but muslims from the northern parts
of India and from Pakistan (the Ceylon people I knew were
Buddhist and hindu) REALLY HATED JEWS. It worked out
ok------they seemed to assume I am Christian-----that's how
I found out how much they hated jews-------they expected me
to share the opinion-------so I played along----sometimes.
One poor young Opthamologist from Pakistan was HORRIFIED at my claim to be a jew----he insisted
"IT's NOT TRUE"
As to dog------what makes you think he hates "all muslims"-----did he ever say that? Did he say just being born a muslim
is like proof of corruption like so many people say of jews-----
the ones I correctly call islamo nazis

I was quite the ardent ping pong player when at the university and used to hang out with lots of Saudis. They were better players as a rule and I wanted to hone my skills. This was probably before she was born. I have never said I haven't met any Muslims and she is simply lying. It's what she does.

 

[irosie91]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

you make a point that interests me Coyote. You accused
Dog of hating muslims without having met one. Long ago--
when I was young (and beautiful) ----I met LOTS AND LOTS of muslims----together with lots of other people from India, Pakistan Iran even Ceylon (well it WAS Ceylon)------of
those people-----the ones who really really hated jews----
were the muslims who never met a jew.. Hindus, Sikhs, etc etc did not hate jews-------some even had jewish friends---
usually in Bombay------but muslims from the northern parts
of India and from Pakistan (the Ceylon people I knew were
Buddhist and hindu) REALLY HATED JEWS. It worked out
ok------they seemed to assume I am Christian-----that's how
I found out how much they hated jews-------they expected me
to share the opinion-------so I played along----sometimes.
One poor young Opthamologist from Pakistan was HORRIFIED at my claim to be a jew----he insisted
"IT's NOT TRUE"
As to dog------what makes you think he hates "all muslims"-----did he ever say that? Did he say just being born a muslim
is like proof of corruption like so many people say of jews-----
the ones I correctly call islamo nazis

When people have never met "the other" it's easy to believe they aren't like other people and to believe in conspiracy theories and fear mongering. The danger in actually meeting them and talking with them is that you might realize that they are just like other people - just as good, bad, pig-headed, ignorant, educated, smart, stupid....

Look at how the level of anti-semitism and wide spread acceptance of conspiracy theories has risen among the Palestinians. With increased seperation over the years many have never met a Jew.

As far as India - antisemitism among India's Hindus is around 18% - .not a miniscule number.

As far as Dogma's views to Muslims - I have yet to see a single post from him that doesn't totally villafy them as a whole - without distinction. What other conclusion can be drawn?

The poll is meaningless------anti Semitism was imposed
upon Hindus by the ----person now actually recognized by
the intelligentsia of india as having done more harm than good-----MAHATMA GANDHI-------he would have given his
liver to keep INDIA UNIFIED and was happy to kiss-up
to muslims ---------the average indian is
still worshipping Gandhi. I got my history of india from
Hindus and my history of Pakistan from muslims ------who
still live in the MOGHUL EMPIRE in their dreams ---both the
muslims from India and the Muslims from Pakistan.-----btw---
as anti semitic are are hindus of india-------multiply that by
a million for the ANTI HINDU sentiments of the MUSLIMS OF INDIA -----as in "someday we'll drink their blood"-----I
was horrified that a surgeon from New Dehli felt that way
about his hindu countrymen

 

[irosie91]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

you make a point that interests me Coyote. You accused
Dog of hating muslims without having met one. Long ago--
when I was young (and beautiful) ----I met LOTS AND LOTS of muslims----together with lots of other people from India, Pakistan Iran even Ceylon (well it WAS Ceylon)------of
those people-----the ones who really really hated jews----
were the muslims who never met a jew.. Hindus, Sikhs, etc etc did not hate jews-------some even had jewish friends---
usually in Bombay------but muslims from the northern parts
of India and from Pakistan (the Ceylon people I knew were
Buddhist and hindu) REALLY HATED JEWS. It worked out
ok------they seemed to assume I am Christian-----that's how
I found out how much they hated jews-------they expected me
to share the opinion-------so I played along----sometimes.
One poor young Opthamologist from Pakistan was HORRIFIED at my claim to be a jew----he insisted
"IT's NOT TRUE"
As to dog------what makes you think he hates "all muslims"-----did he ever say that? Did he say just being born a muslim
is like proof of corruption like so many people say of jews-----
the ones I correctly call islamo nazis

I was quite the ardent ping pong player when at the university and used to hang out with lots of Saudis. They were better players as a rule and I wanted to hone my skills. This was probably before she was born. I have never said I haven't met any Muslims and she is simply lying. It's what she does.

your comment interests me Dog. Of the hundreds of muslims I have encountered-----the most opened and
NOT INTO THE anti jewish crap was a Saudi. ----he may
have been from the ROYAL FAMILY-------which is not really a big deal in Saudi Arabia-----there are thousands of them---but
they do get STUFF------like money. Chances are your fellow students were also "princes"------the rest of Saudi Arabia------does not get "the money" or the scholarships.
My Saudi colleague did not have much use for the system----
he was proud of ----his saudiness----sorta-----but seemed to
see its problems. I got the impression that he would have been happy to never see Saudi Arabia again

 

[CAPTCHATHIS]

I smell a movie, "Rosie and Kumar Go to White Castle"

 

[Mojo2]

But such a thing as free speech does not exist in Muslim countries. Never did, and never will.

And again, you are talking about Turkey, a secular country which at some point in recent history banned Islamism to the point that even it's official language was changed to Latin / Greek. Now of course, it's taken a turn for the much worse with this new leadership. What I'm saying is the act of a Christian man marrying a Muslim woman without first converting to Islam, is punishable by death in many Muslim countries. I'm wondering how even in Turkey, you guys were issued a marriage certificate. Perhaps you married in US.

There is no such thing as a cool head when it comes to Muslims (generally speaking). There is a certain capacity for rational thought and reason, which for some reason or another Islam seems to wipe out of the human brain. Having been around Muslims I know this to be a fact. Why do you think there seems to be an endless amount of people in the Muslim world willing to put on a suicide vest and go blow themselves up? Picture the act and then ask yourself, is it poverty, education, or is it the degree of the grievance? You have people under worse conditions that never did the kinds of horrific things Muslims do. The answer can be one thing and one thing alone: it's the ideology. Let's be honest and call a spade a spade.

I don't know who you're hearing what you're hearing about Turkey from...but my experience was different, because I was there.

Neither Islam nor Christianity is banned in Turkey, and nobody is proposing either.

Marrying a Muslim woman without being a Muslim, in Turkey, Iraq, and Syria, is not punishable at all. We did raise some eyebrows but we carried around our marriage license, and when we would check into hotels all around the region (NOT JUST TURKEY) that license would put the managers at ease. They were mostly concerned that she was a hooker.

We were married in a civil ceremony because the Mosque wouldn't do it. Kind of like how rednecks won't marry gays in churches over here.

There are tons of cool heads all over the middle east, and most people have them.

My take.....the people in the middle east who are ass holes, would probably have been ass holes if they were Christians or whatever else.

Has it ever occurred to you that the evil of Islam which we should resist are the efforts to make America like the Middle East?

Once the entire country is 50% or greater Islamic things here will be more like what you experienced.

But the spear point of the Islamic Jihad, where they are confronting non-Muslim cultures and societies and forcing their will on others, that is where your focus should be.

No, that is paranoid, and it'll never happen

Muslim or Dhimmi or not, it is already happening below our radars.

Let me know when they're "on the radar", and we'll drone them to death, then nuke em' if that doesn't work

Untill then, freak out all you want

Dhimmis surrender their "radar" when they capitulate and cooperate with the captors.

You are a Muslim and if not, you POST like a Muslim.

That warrants treating you as an apologist for Islam.

Until it's shown otherwise.

 

[Mojo2]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

you make a point that interests me Coyote. You accused
Dog of hating muslims without having met one. Long ago--
when I was young (and beautiful) ----I met LOTS AND LOTS of muslims----together with lots of other people from India, Pakistan Iran even Ceylon (well it WAS Ceylon)------of
those people-----the ones who really really hated jews----
were the muslims who never met a jew.. Hindus, Sikhs, etc etc did not hate jews-------some even had jewish friends---
usually in Bombay------but muslims from the northern parts
of India and from Pakistan (the Ceylon people I knew were
Buddhist and hindu) REALLY HATED JEWS. It worked out
ok------they seemed to assume I am Christian-----that's how
I found out how much they hated jews-------they expected me
to share the opinion-------so I played along----sometimes.
One poor young Opthamologist from Pakistan was HORRIFIED at my claim to be a jew----he insisted
"IT's NOT TRUE"
As to dog------what makes you think he hates "all muslims"-----did he ever say that? Did he say just being born a muslim
is like proof of corruption like so many people say of jews-----
the ones I correctly call islamo nazis

Did you know this?

Striving to institute Worldwide Sharia Law is a religious duty of ALL Muslims. Including lovely, peaceful moderates.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

your comment interests me Dog. Of the hundreds of muslims I have encountered-----the most opened and
NOT INTO THE anti jewish crap was a Saudi. ----he may
have been from the ROYAL FAMILY-------which is not really a big deal in Saudi Arabia-----there are thousands of them---but
they do get STUFF------like money. Chances are your fellow students were also "princes"------the rest of Saudi Arabia------does not get "the money" or the scholarships.
My Saudi colleague did not have much use for the system----
he was proud of ----his saudiness----sorta-----but seemed to
see its problems. I got the impression that he would have been happy to never see Saudi Arabia again

The fellows I knew were Royals. They loved their red corvettes, which they drove around campus when the rest of us were on bicycles. Lots of Saudis were pouring into American Universities in the early 70s, often to study something like engineering or geology.

 

[irosie91]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

you make a point that interests me Coyote. You accused
Dog of hating muslims without having met one. Long ago--
when I was young (and beautiful) ----I met LOTS AND LOTS of muslims----together with lots of other people from India, Pakistan Iran even Ceylon (well it WAS Ceylon)------of
those people-----the ones who really really hated jews----
were the muslims who never met a jew.. Hindus, Sikhs, etc etc did not hate jews-------some even had jewish friends---
usually in Bombay------but muslims from the northern parts
of India and from Pakistan (the Ceylon people I knew were
Buddhist and hindu) REALLY HATED JEWS. It worked out
ok------they seemed to assume I am Christian-----that's how
I found out how much they hated jews-------they expected me
to share the opinion-------so I played along----sometimes.
One poor young Opthamologist from Pakistan was HORRIFIED at my claim to be a jew----he insisted
"IT's NOT TRUE"
As to dog------what makes you think he hates "all muslims"-----did he ever say that? Did he say just being born a muslim
is like proof of corruption like so many people say of jews-----
the ones I correctly call islamo nazis

Did you know this?

Striving to institute Worldwide Sharia Law is a religious duty of ALL Muslims. Including lovely, peaceful moderates.

Of course I know it------I have been in contact with lots of muslims for more than 45 years------I know the stuff-
And now for the GOOD NEWS-------everyone in the world is
DELIGHTED to be under shariah law------it is the ideal
state for ALL PEOPLE - IT IS PERFECT------better than chocolate five times per day-----on hallucinogenic mushrooms

Where have you been------ACHMADINEJAD himself----in his
INFINITE WISDOM-------stood like a slightly over grown
ferret-------in the MAIN ASSEMBLY ROOM OF THE
UN BUILDING and announced >>>

**)))) ISLAM IS THE RELIGION FOR ALL MANKIND(((**

did you see anyone----like orderlies from Bellevue Hospital
rush in ----tie him up in two straightjackets and DRAG HIM
OFF?-------nope--------so he must have been right!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[irosie91]

your comment interests me Dog. Of the hundreds of muslims I have encountered-----the most opened and
NOT INTO THE anti jewish crap was a Saudi. ----he may
have been from the ROYAL FAMILY-------which is not really a big deal in Saudi Arabia-----there are thousands of them---but
they do get STUFF------like money. Chances are your fellow students were also "princes"------the rest of Saudi Arabia------does not get "the money" or the scholarships.
My Saudi colleague did not have much use for the system----
he was proud of ----his saudiness----sorta-----but seemed to
see its problems. I got the impression that he would have been happy to never see Saudi Arabia again

The fellows I knew were Royals. They loved their red corvettes, which they drove around campus when the rest of us were on bicycles. Lots of Saudis were pouring into American Universities in the early 70s, often to study something like engineering or geology.

yup----my Saudi was doing medical residency -----he ended up later on in MONTEFIORE HOSPITAL ------that's the one
associated with Yeshiva University Medical school-------

poor old MONTEFIORE probably turned over in his grave--------did you ever hear about EINSTEIN's encounter
with Saudi Princeton boys way back in the 50s? The royals get it all over there---THOUSANDS OF THEM-----the
king had kids in every port

 

[Coyote]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

Living in the west as you now are, you must find it frustrating to be limited to calling somebody a racist bigot for opposing your agenda.

Not at all. It's simply calling a spade a spade.

I imagine you must long for the day when your numbers have increased sufficiently to get a right, proper fatwa issued to take care of your problem.

There you go again...

 

[Coyote]

When Judaism is attacked, the attackers are openly denounced by a large contingent of this board. When Christianity is attacked - similar. When Islam is attacked - that same contingent that would defend the others jumps on the bandwagon and joins in the hate. Someone needs to speak up, present other view points or in some cases the truth. It certainly won't be the likes of you and your ilk who are more likely to be seen demanding Islam be undesignated as a religion and that it's worshippers be deported or deprived of their civil rights.

This is about what YOU do, not what other people do. You lied. You are a bald-faced liar and your very purpose in propagandizing across various boards is to lie.

You do not treat all religions the same, to which your many tens of thousands of posts attests. You treat the defense of Islam as your very mission in life.

You sure like to think you know what other people think don't you? You don't. You're just one more racist bigot who's admittted he's never even met a Muslim yet feels qualified to demonize them all.

All religions have their good and their dark sides. When a group gets demonized with hate rhetoric - someone better speak up. We've all seen where that kind of crap can lead.

I'm curious - what's your "solution" to the "Muslim problem" in America? I'm sure you have one, despite never having met a Muslim, so let's hear it.

you make a point that interests me Coyote. You accused
Dog of hating muslims without having met one. Long ago--
when I was young (and beautiful) ----I met LOTS AND LOTS of muslims----together with lots of other people from India, Pakistan Iran even Ceylon (well it WAS Ceylon)------of
those people-----the ones who really really hated jews----
were the muslims who never met a jew.. Hindus, Sikhs, etc etc did not hate jews-------some even had jewish friends---
usually in Bombay------but muslims from the northern parts
of India and from Pakistan (the Ceylon people I knew were
Buddhist and hindu) REALLY HATED JEWS. It worked out
ok------they seemed to assume I am Christian-----that's how
I found out how much they hated jews-------they expected me
to share the opinion-------so I played along----sometimes.
One poor young Opthamologist from Pakistan was HORRIFIED at my claim to be a jew----he insisted
"IT's NOT TRUE"
As to dog------what makes you think he hates "all muslims"-----did he ever say that? Did he say just being born a muslim
is like proof of corruption like so many people say of jews-----
the ones I correctly call islamo nazis

I was quite the ardent ping pong player when at the university and used to hang out with lots of Saudis. They were better players as a rule and I wanted to hone my skills. This was probably before she was born. I have never said I haven't met any Muslims and she is simply lying. It's what she does.

This is what you said:

Are you sure it wasn't right about the second or third grade when you stopped reading?

It is true that I do not know any Mulsims, though. Mulsims are very hard to find.

How odd, though, isn't it that you have proven how completely ignorant you are as to the attitudes towards apostasy in Islam, while I was the one who actually knew. I suppose that is because I have not stopped reading, while you never have.

If you met a Muslim you would "know" a Muslim.

Try to keep your lies straight when you're making shit up.

 

[Roudy]

Two different questions, dipstick. No one's going to change the world here. This is an OPINION board.

Perhaps you should consider that putting Western values and tolerance to Muslim societies on the same level is a total fraud. You seem to have a problem with free speech, are you sure you didn't convert to Islam? LOL

I'm tempted to deny you the answers to your questions, because of the deprivation you bestow on mine.

But I'm reassured about your sanity if your goals are simply "awareness"

And honestly...that region could use more cool heads.

As for free speech. It's actually alive and well within our exchange. You've expressed your opinions, and backed them up with why you have them. I have rejected them, and your sources, and expressed my opinions. Then you rejected my opinions, and so on.

As for converting to Islam, once when I was in love...I asked the local Sunni preacher, as I called him, if it would benefit my wife to covert. He said my reasons were wrong, and advised against it. He was probably right, because we got divorced in the US 5 years later. She now lives with a conservative redneck in Texas...go figure.

But such a thing as free speech does not exist in Muslim countries. Never did, and never will.

And again, you are talking about Turkey, a secular country which at some point in recent history banned Islamism to the point that even it's official language was changed to Latin / Greek. Now of course, it's taken a turn for the much worse with this new leadership. What I'm saying is the act of a Christian man marrying a Muslim woman without first converting to Islam, is punishable by death in many Muslim countries. I'm wondering how even in Turkey, you guys were issued a marriage certificate. Perhaps you married in US.

There is no such thing as a cool head when it comes to Muslims (generally speaking). There is a certain capacity for rational thought and reason, which for some reason or another Islam seems to wipe out of the human brain. Having been around Muslims I know this to be a fact. Why do you think there seems to be an endless amount of people in the Muslim world willing to put on a suicide vest and go blow themselves up? Picture the act and then ask yourself, is it poverty, education, or is it the degree of the grievance? You have people under worse conditions that never did the kinds of horrific things Muslims do. The answer can be one thing and one thing alone: it's the ideology. Let's be honest and call a spade a spade.

I don't know who you're hearing what you're hearing about Turkey from...but my experience was different, because I was there.

Neither Islam nor Christianity is banned in Turkey, and nobody is proposing either.

Marrying a Muslim woman without being a Muslim, in Turkey, Iraq, and Syria, is not punishable at all. We did raise some eyebrows but we carried around our marriage license, and when we would check into hotels all around the region (NOT JUST TURKEY) that license would put the managers at ease. They were mostly concerned that she was a hooker.

We were married in a civil ceremony because the Mosque wouldn't do it. Kind of like how rednecks won't marry gays in churches over here.

There are tons of cool heads all over the middle east, and most people have them.

My take.....the people in the middle east who are ass holes, would probably have been ass holes if they were Christians or whatever else.

Like I said a Turkey was and probably is different. I have not been there but have studied enough. Many of my friends and family have been there for vacation. Heard its beautiful, but I'm not setting foot in any Muslim country ever again. Have you read about Turkey's history? This is the reason a non Muslim can marry a Muslim. Unfortunately many of the reforms have been reversed. Read this and ask yourself, why did a Muslim nation ABOLISH Islam from its national psyche? Perhaps FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE? The Shah of Iran and his father were very similar rulers before the Islamist animals took over and destroyed the country:

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (pronounced [mustäˈfä ceˈmäl äˈtäˌtyɾc]; 19 May 1881 (conventional) – 10 November 1938) was aTurkish army officer, reformist statesman, and the first President of Turkey. He is credited with being the founder of theRepublic of Turkey. His surname, Atatürk (meaning "Father of the Turks"), was granted to him in 1934 and forbidden to any other person by the Turkish parliament.[1]

Atatürk was a military officer during World War I.[2] Following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, he led theTurkish National Movement in the Turkish War of Independence. Having established a provisional government in Ankara, he defeated the forces sent by the Allies. His military campaigns led to victory in the Turkish War of Independence. Atatürk then embarked upon a program of political, economic, and cultural reforms, seeking to transform the former Ottoman Empire into a modern and secular nation-state. Under his leadership, thousands of new schools were built, primary education was made free and compulsory, and women were given equal civil and political rights, while the burden of taxation on peasants was reduced.[3] His government also carried out an extensive policy of Turkification.[4][5][6][7] The principles of Atatürk's reforms, upon which modern Turkey was established, are referred to as Kemalism.

Domestic policies
Mustafa Kemal's basic tenet was the complete independence of the country.[63] He clarified his position:

“ ...by complete independence, we mean of course complete economic, financial, juridical, military, cultural independence and freedom in all matters. Being deprived of independence in any of these is equivalent to the nation and country being deprived of all its independence.[64] ”
He led wide-ranging reforms in social, cultural, and economical aspects, establishing the new Republic's backbone of legislative, judicial, and economic structures. Though he was later idealized by some as an originator of sweeping reforms, many of his reformist ideas were already common in Ottoman intellectual circles at the turn of the 20th century, and were expressed more openly after the Young Turk Revolution.[65]

Mustafa Kemal created a banner to mark the changes between the old Ottoman and the new republican rule. Each change was symbolized as an arrow in this banner. This defining ideology of the Republic of Turkey is referred to as the "Six Arrows", or Kemalist ideology. Kemalist ideology is based on Mustafa Kemal's conception of realism and pragmatism.[66] The fundamentals of nationalism, populism and etatism were all defined under the Six Arrows. These fundamentals were not new in world politics or, indeed, among the elite of Turkey. What made them unique was that these interrelated fundamentals were formulated specifically for Turkey's needs. A good example is the definition and application of secularism; the Kemalist secular state significantly differed from predominantly Christian states.

Civic independence and the Caliphate, 1924–1925

Abolition of the Caliphate was an important dimension in Mustafa Kemal's drive to reform the political system and to promote the national sovereignty. By the consensus of the Muslim majority in early centuries, the caliphate was the core political concept of Sunni Islam.[72] Abolishing the sultanate was easier because the survival of the Caliphate at the time satisfied the partisans of the sultanate. This produced a split system with the new republic on one side and an Islamic form of government with the Caliph on the other side, and Mustafa Kemal and İnönü worried that "it nourished the expectations that the sovereign would return under the guise of Caliph."[73] Caliph Abdülmecid II was elected after the abolition of the sultanate (1922).

The caliph had his own personal treasury and also had a personal service that included military personnel; Mustafa Kemal said that there was no "religious" or "political" justification for this. He believed that Caliph Abdülmecid II was following in the steps of the sultans in domestic and foreign affairs: accepting of and responding to foreign representatives and reserve officers, and participating in official ceremonies and celebrations.[74] He wanted to integrate the powers of the caliphate into the powers of the GNA. His initial activities began on 1 January 1924, when[74] İnönü, Çakmak and Özalp consented to the abolition of the caliphate. The caliph made a statement to the effect that he would not interfere with political affairs.[75] On 1 March 1924, at the Assembly, Mustafa Kemal said

“ The religion of Islam will be elevated if it will cease to be a political instrument, as had been the case in the past.[76] ”
On 3 March 1924, the caliphate was officially abolished and its powers within Turkey were transferred to the GNA. Other Muslim nations debated the validity of Turkey's unilateral abolition of the caliphate as they decided whether they should confirm the Turkish action or appoint a new caliph.[75] A "Caliphate Conference" was held in Cairo in May 1926 and a resolution was passed declaring the caliphate "a necessity in Islam", but failed to implement this decision.[75]

Two other Islamic conferences were held in Mecca (1926) and Jerusalem (1931), but failed to reach a consensus.[75] Turkey did not accept the re-establishment of the caliphate and perceived it as an attack to its basic existence; while Mustafa Kemal and the reformists continued their own way.[77]

On 8 April 1924, sharia courts were abolished with the law "Mehakim-i Şer'iyenin İlgasına ve Mehakim Teşkilatına Ait Ahkamı Muaddil Kanun".[65][78]

The removal of the caliphate was followed by an extensive effort to establish the separation of governmental and religious affairs. Education was the cornerstone in this effort. In 1923, there were three main educational groups of institutions. The most common institutions were medreses based on Arabic, the Qur'an and memorization. The second type of institution was idadî and sultanî, the reformist schools of the Tanzimat era. The last group included colleges and minority schools in foreign languages that used the latest teaching models in educating pupils. The old medrese education was modernized.[79] Mustafa Kemal changed the classical Islamic education for a vigorously promoted reconstruction of educational institutions.[79]Mustafa Kemal linked educational reform to the liberation of the nation from dogma, which he believed was more important than the Turkish War of Independence.

“ Today, our most important and most productive task is the national education [unification and modernization] affairs. We have to be successful in national education affairs and we shall be. The liberation of a nation is only achieved through this way."[80] ”
In the summer of 1924, Mustafa Kemal invited American educational reformer John Dewey to Ankara to advise him on how to reform Turkish education.[79] His public education reforms aimed to prepare citizens for roles in public life through increasing the public literacy. He wanted to institute compulsory primary education for both girls and boys; since then this effort has been an ongoing task for the republic. He pointed out that one of the main targets of education in Turkey had to be raising a generation nourished with what he called the "public culture". The state schools established a common curriculum which became known as the "unification of education."

Unification of education was put into force on 3 March 1924 by the Law on Unification of Education (No. 430). With the new law, education became inclusive, organized on a model of the civil community. In this new design, all schools submitted their curriculum to the "Ministry of National Education", a government agency modelled after other countries' ministries of education. Concurrently, the republic abolished the two ministries and made clergy subordinate to the department of religious affairs, one of the foundations of secularism in Turkey. The unification of education under one curriculum ended "clerics or clergy of the Ottoman Empire", but was not the end of religious schools in Turkey; they were moved to higher education until later governments restored them to their former position in secondary after Mustafa Kemal's death.


Atatürk with his Panama hat just afterthe Kastamonu speech in 1925.
Beginning in the fall of 1925, Mustafa Kemal encouraged the Turks to wear modern European attire.[81] He was determined to force the abandonment of the sartorial traditions of the Middle East and finalize a series of dress reforms, which were originally started byMahmud II.[81] The fez was established by Sultan Mahmud II in 1826 as part of the Ottoman Empire's modernization effort. The Hat Law of 1925 introduced the use of Western-style hats instead of the fez. Mustafa Kemal first made the hat compulsory for civil servants.[81] The guidelines for the proper dressing of students and state employees were passed during his lifetime; many civil servants adopted the hat willingly. In 1925, Mustafa Kemal wore his "Panama hat" during a public appearance in Kastamonu, one of the most conservative towns in Anatolia, to explain that the hat was the headgear of civilized nations. The last part of reform on dress emphasized the need to wear modern Western suits with neckties as well as Fedora and Derby-style hats instead of antiquated religion-based clothing such as the veil and turban in the Law Relating to Prohibited Garments of 1934.

Even though he personally promoted modern dress for women, Mustafa Kemal never made specific reference to women's clothing in the law, as he believed that women would adapt to the new clothing styles of their own free will. He was frequently photographed on public business with his wife Lâtife Uşaklıgil, who covered her head in accordance with Islamic tradition. He was also frequently photographed on public business with women wearing modern Western clothes. But it was Atatürk's adopted daughters, Sabiha Gökçen and Afet İnan, who provided the real role model for the Turkish women of the future. He wrote: "The religious covering of women will not cause difficulty ... This simple style [of headcovering] is not in conflict with the morals and manners of our society."[82]

On 30 August 1925, Mustafa Kemal's view on religious insignia used outside places of worship was introduced in hisKastamonu speech. This speech also had another position. He said:

“ In the face of knowledge, science, and of the whole extent of radiant civilization, I cannot accept the presence in Turkey's civilized community of people primitive enough to seek material and spiritual benefits in the guidance of sheiks. The Turkish republic cannot be a country of sheiks, dervishes, and disciples. The best, the truest order is the order of civilization. To be a man it is enough to carry out the requirements of civilization. The leaders of dervish orders will understand the truth of my words, and will themselves close down their lodges [tekke] and admit that their disciplines have grown up.[63] ”
On 2 September the government issued a decree closing down all Sufi orders and the tekkes. Mustafa Kemal ordered their dervish lodges to be converted to museums, such as Mevlana Museum in Konya. The institutional expression of Sufism became illegal in Turkey; a politically neutral form of Sufism, functioning as social associations, was permitted to exist.[citation needed]

The abolition of the caliphate and other cultural reforms were met with fierce opposition. [75]

Modernization efforts, 1926–1930

President Kemal at the 1927 opening of the State Art and Sculpture Museum.

President Mustafa Kemal Atatürk introducing the new Turkish alphabet to the people of Kayseri on 20 September 1928.

Present Mustafa Kemal Atatürk at the library of the Çankaya Presidential Residence in Ankara, 1929.

Attending a class at the Law School of theIstanbul Darülfünunu in 1930.
In the years following 1926, Mustafa Kemal introduced a radical departure from previous reformations established by the Ottoman Empire.[88] For the first time in history, Islamic law was separated from secular law, and restricted to matters of religion.[88] Mustafa Kemal said

“ We must liberate our concepts of justice, our laws and our legal institutions from the bonds which, even though they are incompatible with the needs of our century, still hold a tight grip on us.[89] ”
On 1 March 1926, the Turkish penal code was passed. It was modelled after the Italian Penal Code. On 4 October 1926, Islamic courts were closed. Establishing the civic law needed time, so Mustafa Kemal delayed the inclusion of the principle of laïcité until 5 February 1937.

Ottoman practice discouraged social interaction between men and women in keeping with Islamic practice of sex segregation. Mustafa Kemal began developing social reforms very early, as was evident in his personal journal. He and his staff discussed issues like abolishing the veiling of womenand the integration of women into the outside world. The clue on how he was planning to tackle the issue was stated in his journal on November 1915;

“ The social change can come by (1) educating capable mothers who are knowledgeable about life; (2) giving freedom to women; (3) a man can change his morals, thoughts, and feelings by leading a common life with a woman; as there is an inborn tendency towards the attraction of mutual affection.[90] ”
Mustafa Kemal needed a new civil code to establish his second major step of giving freedom to women. The first part was the education of girls and was established with the unification of education. On 4 October 1926, the new Turkish civil code passed. It was modelled after the Swiss Civil Code. Under the new code, women gained equality with men in such matters as inheritance and divorce. Mustafa Kemal did not consider gender a factor in social organization. According to his view, society marched towards its goal with men and women united. He believed that it was scientifically impossible for him to achieve progress and to become civilized if the gender separation continued as in Ottoman times.[91] During a meeting he declaimed:

“ To the women: Win for us the battle of education and you will do yet more for your country than we have been able to do. It is to you that I appeal.
To the men: If henceforward the women do not share in the social life of the nation, we shall never attain to our full development. We shall remain irremediably backward, incapable of treating on equal terms with the civilizations of the West.[92] ”
In 1927, the State Art and Sculpture Museum (Turkish: Ankara Resim ve Heykel Müzesi) opened its doors. The museum highlighted sculpture, which was little practised in Turkey owing to the Islamic tradition of avoiding idolatry. Mustafa Kemal believed that "culture is the foundation of the Turkish Republic."[93] and described modern Turkey's ideological thrust as "a creation of patriotism blended with a lofty humanist ideal." He included both his own nation's creative legacy and what he saw as the admirable values of global civilization. The pre-Islamic culture of the Turks became the subject of extensive research, and particular emphasis was laid upon Turkish culture widespread before the Seljuk and Ottoman civilizations. He instigated study of Anatolian civilizations--Phrygians and Lydians, Sumerians and Hittites. To attract current public attention to past cultures, he personally named the "Sümerbank" (1932) after the Sumerians, and the "Etibank" (1935) after the Hittites. He also stressed the folk arts of the countryside as a wellspring of Turkish creativity.

In the spring of 1928, Mustafa Kemal met in Ankara with several linguists and professors from all over Turkey where he unveiled to them a plan of his to implement a new alphabet for the written Turkish language based on a modified Latin alphabet. The new Turkish alphabet would serve as a replacement for the old Arabic script and as a solution to the literacy problem in Turkey. When he asked them how long it would take to implement the new alphabet into the Turkish language, most of the professors and linguists said between three to five years. Mustafa Kemal was said to have scoffed and openly stated, "we shall do it in three to five months".[citation needed]

Over the next several months, Mustafa Kemal pressed for the introduction of the new Turkish alphabet as well as made public announcements to the upcoming overhaul of the new alphabet. On 1 November 1928 he introduced the new Turkish alphabet and abolished the use of Arabic script. At the time, literate citizens of the country comprised as little as 10% of the population. Dewey noted to Mustafa Kemal that learning how to read and write in Turkish with the Arabic script took roughly three years with rather strenuous methods at the elementary level.[79] They used the Ottoman Language written in the Arabic script with Arabic and Persian loan vocabulary.[79] The creation of the new Turkish alphabet as a variant of the Latin alphabet was undertaken by the Language Commission (Turkish: Dil Encümeni) with the initiative of Mustafa Kemal.[79] The tutelage was received from an Ottoman-Armenian calligrapher Hagop Dilaçar.[94] The first Turkish newspaper using the new alphabet was published on 15 December 1928. Mustafa Kemal himself travelled the countryside in order to teach citizens the new alphabet. As he predicted, the country's adaptation to the new alphabet was very quick, and literacy in Turkey jumped from 10% to over 70% within two years.[citation needed] Beginning in 1932, the People's Houses (Turkish: Halk Evleri) opened throughout the country in order to meet the requirement that people between the ages of four and 40 were required to learn the new alphabet as mandated. There were congresses for discussing the issues of copyright, public education and scientific publishing. Literacy reform was also supported by strengthening the private publishing sector with a new law on copyrights.

Mustafa Kemal promoted modern teaching methods at the primary education level, and Dewey took a place of honour.[79]Dewey presented a paradigmatic set of recommendations designed for developing societies that are moving towards modernity in his "Report and Recommendation for the Turkish educational system."[79] He was interested in adult educationfor the goal of forming a skill base in the country. Turkish women were taught not only child care, dress-making and household management, but also skills needed to join the economy outside the home. Turkish education became a state-supervised system, which was designed to create a skill base for the social and economic progress of the country.[95] His "unified" education program was designed to educate responsible citizens as well as useful and appreciated members of society.[79] Turkish education became an integrative system, aimed to alleviate poverty and used female education to establish gender equality.

Mustafa Kemal generated media attention to propagate modern education during this period. He instigated official education meetings called "Science Boards" and "Education Summits." to discuss the quality of education, training issues and certain basic educational principles. He said, "our schools [curriculum] should aim to provide opportunities for all pupils to learn and to achieve." He was personally engaged with the development of two textbooks. The first one was Turkish: Vatandaş İçin Medeni Bilgiler (1930). The second, Geometry (1937), was a text for high schools. The Vatandaş İçin Medeni Bilgiler (Civic knowledge for the citizens) introduced the science of comparative government and explained the means of administering public trust by explaining the rules of governance as applied to the new state institutions.

On 5 December 1934, Turkey moved to grant full political rights to women, before several other European nations. The equal rights of women in marriage had already been established in the earlier Turkish civil code.[109] Women's place in Mustafa Kemal's cultural reforms was best expressed in the civic book prepared under his supervision.[110] Mustafa Kemal said that

“ There is no logical explanation for the political disenfranchisement of women. Any hesitation and negative mentality on this subject is nothing more than a fading social phenomenon of the past. ...Women must have the right to vote and to be elected; because democracy dictates that, because there are interests that women must defend, and because there are social duties that women must perform.[111]

Thank you....you just proved to me you're crazy

And you just proved to me that you're about as ignorant as a redneck when it comes to the history of Turkey and the Middle East. Like I said, your limited exposure in Turkey didn't count because you A- were in a very secular reformed country, with an anti Islamization culture in it's past, and B- Weren't really in touch with any minorities, so how the fuck would you know what the Muslim majority was doing to them?

Good news is I'm not going to charge you for this free education, dufus. Here's what is happening to all the reforms that Attaturk had brought about. Telling the truth isn't crazy. Ignoring it is:

4 Jarring Signs of Turkey s Growing Islamization - The Atlantic

Turn right at the omelet," said the gas-station attendant. We were standing on the outskirts of Edirne, a small city about two hours north of Istanbul. My Turkish is poor so I turned for help to my Turkish friend.

"Omelet?" I asked.

Turkey's building boom includes 17,000 new mosques constructed by the government since 2002.
"He meant outlet," he said, as in outlet mall. On today's Turkish highways, outlet malls are more common than caravanserais or roadside inns once were on the Silk Road. The malls are just one sign of the economic boom that is bringing western consumerism to the masses. Arriving in Istanbul from one of the phlegmatic economies of Europe or even from the United States is a jolt. Drive around western or central Turkey and you'll see new roads, high rises, and construction sites everywhere. Much of it comes from Middle Eastern oil money, much of it reinvested into industries such as automobile manufacture, textile, and food production. A recent trip revealed a Turkey that is wealthier than ever in its modern history.

And yet, the gas jockey had it right. For the average person, Westernization is about as deep as the difference between "omelet" and "outlet." The Turkish government wouldn't have it any other way. The Justice and Development Party (AKP) has been in power for more than ten years, with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in charge for most of them. Their goal is change. They want to make Turkey wealthy and Islamic. They have turned from the vaguely socialist policies of their predecessors to crony capitalism, and from the staunchly secular and pro-western policies established by Ataturk, the Republic's founder, to religious and Muslim-world-centered policies. They have abandoned Ataturk's non-interventionist stance for an active role in Egypt, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and now Syria.

Turkey's building boom includes 17,000 new mosques built by the government since 2002. The state is planning an enormous mosque, more than 150,000 square feet in size, to loom over Istanbul on a hill on the Asian side of the Bosphorus. Secularists are outraged, and an opposition leader, Republican People's Party (CHP) MP Mehmet Ali Ediboglu, calls this just another step in a process that, he claims, will end in an Islamic republic.

Whither Turkey? Erdogan's visit to Washington last week is a reminder of how important that question is. President Barack Obama has called Turkey a critical ally and has spoken of his friendship for the Turkish leader. Yet Erdogan is trying to change the Turkish constitution from a parliamentary to a presidential system -- with the hope, of course, that he will be the president. His opponent's charge that Erdogan's model is Russia's Putin, a virtual dictator by legal means.

A visitor can only wonder where Erdogan's country is headed. Consider four scenes from the road:

1) Lecturing in a public university on Turkey's western coast -- the country's secular region -- I saw a small but significant number of women wearing headscarves. The government not long ago overturned a ban on headscarves in public places. From the American point of view, that seems like a good thing and a move in favor of religious freedom. Turkish secularists, however, consider it the thin end of a wedge.

2) In Amasya in north-central Turkey sits the graceful Kapiaga Madrasa. It was built in the sixteenth century by Sultan Bayezit II, an enlightened ruler who welcomed Jews and Muslims expelled from Spain in 1492. The octagonal structure is constructed around a central, arcaded courtyard. A visitor encounters what sounds at first like the buzzing of bees. In fact, it is boys studying religious texts.

The day I saw the madrasa I was wearing a baseball cap purchased earlier at a Turkish naval museum. It was decorated with a Turkish flag and a historic warship. The students looked at me with a certain aloof surprise. I didn't realize that I was making a political statement, but my Turkish friend explained that the symbol was nationalist and secular in their eyes.

3) On the way to Edirne, we drove past the exit to Silivri. A summer resort, Silivri is also home to a huge prison. It houses hundreds of top military officers along with journalists, lawyers, and members of Parliament accused of plotting against the government. It is Turkey's answer to the Bastille, the notorious jail for political prisoners in pre-revolutionary France. With 47 reporters incarcerated, Turkey has been called the world's leading jailer of journalists.

4) Arriving in Istanbul at night after a trip to the Anatolian heartland, my friend drove down Baghdad Avenue -- the Rodeo Drive of Istanbul. Rock music and short skirts were on order, not headscarves and religious chanting. Political prisoners seemed far away. But the boys in the madrasa will soon be adults and the women in headscarves will be college graduates. What kind of a country will they build, I wondered, when they come to Istanbul and look up at its grand new mosque? And what will Turkey's future mean for Americans and our own long and troubled quest to build better relations with Muslim countries?

Erdogan resurrects debates of Islamization
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/02/09/193621.html

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s comment that his government wants to “raise a religious youth” has touched a nerve in society, fuelling debates over an alleged “hidden agenda” to Islamize secular Turkey.

“We want to raise a religious youth,” said Erdogan, himself a graduate of a clerical school and the leader of the Islamist-rooted Justice and Development Party (AKP), during a parliamentary address last week.

“Do you expect the conservative democrat AK Party to raise an atheist generation? That might be your business, your mission, but not ours. We will raise a conservative and democratic generation embracing the nation’s values and principles,” he added.


Erdogan’s remarks drew strong criticism from the staunchly secular Republican People’s Party (CHP) founded by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, with its leader calling him a “religion-monger.”

“It is a sin to garner votes over religion. You are not religious but a religion-monger,” said Kemal Kilicdaroglu, accusing Erdogan of polarizing the country by touching its faultlines.

“I’m asking the prime minister: what can I do if I don’t want my child to be raised as religious and conservative?” wrote prominent liberal commentator Hasan Cemal in Milliyet daily.

“If you are going to train a religious and conservative generation in schools, what will happen to my child?” he asked.

Columnist Mehmet Ali Birand also criticized Erdogan this week in an article titled, “The race for piety will be our end.”

“What does it mean, really, that the state raises religious youth? Is this the first step towards a religious state?” he wrote in Hurriyet Daily News.

Erdogan must explain what he meant, otherwise a dangerous storm may erupt and go as far as fights about being religious versus being godless, he argued.

Neither religious nor political uniformity can be imposed on Turkey given regional, ethnic and sectarian diversity in the country, wrote Semih Idiz in Milliyet daily on Tuesday.

He said millions of people “have subscribed to secular lifestyles” even before the republic.

Erdogan’s AKP has been in power since 2002 and won a third term with nearly 50 percent of the vote in the 2011 elections, securing 325 seats in the 550-member parliament.

But since then the influence of the military, considered as guardian of secularism, has waned.

Dozens of retired and active army officers, academics, journalists and lawyers have been put behind bars in probes into alleged plots against Erdogan’s government.

Critics accuse the government of launching the probes as a tool to silence opponents and impose authoritarianism.

Secular quarters argue Erdogan’s conservative government is also step by step imposing religion in every aspect of life, saying many restaurants already refuse to serve alcohol during Ramadan.

They also criticize recent changes to legislation under which religious school graduates will now be able to access any university branch they like, while in the past they had only access to theology schools.

Birand expressed fears that the changes would not be confined to this and would lead to censorship in television broadcasts.

The Turkish television watchdog RTUK “will restrict all kissing scenes; they will confuse pornography with explicit broadcast and all television screens will be made pious,” he added.

“Then will come religious foundations. After them, it will be municipalities. All kinds of Koran teaching courses, legal or illegal, will mushroom.”

Observers say Erdogan’s message contradicts what he had said during a recent tour of Arab Spring countries, in September.

“As Recep Tayyip Erdogan I am a Muslim but not secular. But I am a prime minister of a secular country. People have the freedom to choose whether or not to be religious in a secular regime,” he said in an interview with an Egyptian TV, published by Turkish daily Vatan.

“The constitution in Turkey defines secularism as the state’s equal distance to every religion,” he said in remarks that provoked criticism from the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.