"He insults Turkishness.Let's hire an underage murderer to kill him!"

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Jun 16, 2011 at 17:00

Hi, dhimmi no more wrote :

> Can you imagine what would happen to any Turk that writes that there was really an Armenian Genocide?<

The same what happened to Hrant Dink. A minor would be hired to kill him by broad daylight and the police summoned to arrest the killer and investigate the case would first congratulate the killer and take a proud group photo with the Turkish flag flattering around them. But before the cameras of media people they would shed crocodile tears over the victim and even take part in a demonstration "We are all Armenians" ...to fool the naive Westerners.

> There is no pluralism or secularism in Turkey which means that Turkey is not a democracy and will never be one<

I fully agree and I can only add that Turkey was never intended by her so called 'founder' to be a democracy. Kemal founded a one-party system not so different from that of Saddam Hussein or his contemporaries dictators Mussolini, Hitler or his closest friend Lenin.

As to his "secularism" it's also a devious and crooked story.Kemal's war against the Entente between 1919-1922 was a typical jihad with imams,fatwas,services in the mosques on Fridays,promises of paradise and huris,azans etc. etc. Because of that he was honoured with the supreme jihadist Ottoman title "gazi" - "the Destroyers of Infidels". Later when he became a dictator and converted to "secularism" people who mentioned in public the title gazi in its traditional meaning simply disappeared. But in the course of his jihad it turned out that the caliph didn't want to support him. On the contrary the skeih ul-Islam issued a death fatwa against Kemal.The Kemalist counter-fatwa said the caliph was unfree in the hands of the infidels and so teh fatwa wasn't valid and hat is more in secret he was on Kemal's side.But this lie could not last for ever. As the previous fatwa was not revoked by the caliph revered by all Moslems Kemal had no other choice except to depose the cliph and to save his life to fight the force that made the caliph such a formidable enemy, i.e. Islam.

So secularism in Kemal's case was no lofty, far-sighted deep philosophical ideal at all but only an expedient and necessity of which he as a perfect liar knew how to make a virtue.But what obtained personally for him doesn't apply to anybody else in Turkey! He needed something to oppose Islam in order to survive and feel secure in the old palace of the caliph in Constantinople or in the new one built in Angora.The avarage Turk is in a different situation.He takes being a Moslem as granted and no death fatwa with a reward for his head is issued against him.So secularism is for him as alien as shintoism or Taoism.

And if secularism really meant something in Turkey as it does in the West we wouldn't have after 80 years of forced secularization an amazing 99.8% Moslem monoculture but at least 20-30% or more irreligious,agnostics and atheists in Turkey as in Europe where secularism does mean something without a general-prophet of secularism like Kemal ever revealing it to and imposing it by force upon the European public.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".