Turkish Assembly Votes For Censoring of Web Sites 247
unity100 writes "CNN has some news about a recent development in Turkey where the Turkish assembly, totally out of line with Turkey's commitment to EU membership, has voted to have sites that 'insult to the founder of modern Turkey' censored from entire Turkish population. This, just about a month after the decision to censor YouTube was reached by the Turkish courts. 'On Thursday, lawmakers in the commission also debated whether the proposal should be widened to allow the Turkish Telecommunications Board to block access to any sites that question the principles of the Turkish secular system or the unity of the Turkish state -- a reference to Web sites with information on Kurdish rebels in Turkey.'"
Interesting (Score:4, Interesting)
Turkey is the pinnacle of Islam. (Score:3, Insightful)
We should respect the right of Turks to build their society in whatever way that they wish. The Turks are entitled to reject Western values, just as both the Chinese and the Indians have rejected Western values.
At the same time, we should terminate the current talks that will lead to Turkey becoming a member of the Europ
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your issue appears to be ignorance. The country of Turkey is imbued with Western values and a desire to emulate the West in many ways. Ever wonder why Turkey, especially Istanbul is referred to as a place where East meets West? Probably not, since you obviously don't
Cut with "East meets West" shit already (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
MOD DOWN (-1, Empty of Content) (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a sad thing that the "moderators" seem to be chosen for their ignorance. Your post said absolutely nothing, it's so empty of meaning that it's not even wrong [wikipedia.org].
OTOH, the grandparent post was quite informative on the real issues regarding Turkey. The laws mentioned in the article are actually trying to protect Turkey from Islam extremism. Although it may seem that censorship is not exactly the best way to protect freedom, that was the intention of the T
Let me enlighten you with a turkish saying (Score:4, Informative)
i AM turkish. i am living in turkey for my whole life. i KNOW what it is like here.
there no such thing as "east meets west" exist. it was invented by government in order to make tourism advertisements abroad, and also put turkey's cause forward in european union application back in 1986-1987. Turgut Ozal, was the prime minister then.
again, there is no such thing, and in istanbul east meets east. nobody but the turkish believe in such a thing that "east meets west" exists. its just a hype make-believe.
Re: (Score:2)
so cut with the "east meets west" shit. there no such thing exists. it is some hype concept that government had invented to make tourism advertisements 20-30 years ago. nobody in the world thinks such a thing exists but only us.
Re:Turkey is the pinnacle of Islam. (Score:5, Insightful)
One of those laws being that we in the west are free to criticise and ridicule individuals as we see fit. No doubt the man in question would be the first to insist that no law should be enacted to protect him from such criticism.
Well, you don't seem to know much about turkey eit (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, you don't seem to know much about turkey either. Turkey is probably one of the few countries were you will find the "liberals" siding along with the military powers.
Yes, Turkey is indeed secular and extremely western (depends a bit on what part of the west you compare it to) "thanks" to the efforts of the man who would be come known as ataturk, father turk, for his efforts to turn unite Turkey and turn it into a modern nation.
The problem is this, Turkey is NOT a united country by itself. One turk is NOT the same as another. This is one of the biggest problems with for instance immigration to the west. Those people that are looked down upon in western europe are looked down upon in Turkey as well. It is roughly like how a Hillbilly will be frowned upon in Amsterdam by the locals AND by any visiting New Yorkers.
Turkey however so far has remain united thanks to its military leadership that comes down like a ton of bricks on anyone who dares to take Turkey in an undesired direction. The EU problem is that the Turkey that has the most change to join is also in a very real sense a military dictatorship. If as the EU insists the military reduces its influence then Turkey might very well become an islamic state.
Remember the riots in France about banning headscarfs? Similar stuff happens all over europe usually at the level of should headscarfs be allowed to be worn by public officials, like for instance in the courtsmthe legal system should be impartial, and at least in most european countries judges and other officials are therefore NOT allowed to show any signs of religion or politics. Muslims being allowed to wear headscarfs is therefore a direct attack on western traditions. So what is the case in Turkey? Well, they are banned and the military makes sue that that remains to be the way because they know what secular means.
So yes, turkey is a modern secular state, BUT what the grandparent might have been referring too is that it seems that IF the people in Turkey had a choice that might not remain the case.
Turkey is a democracy, but only so long as the people vote for the "correct" path as laid down by the military. It therefore is also very much a dictarorship, just that in some peoples eyes, that the dictatorships policies are desirable.
Turkey is like a man standing behind you with a gun, forcing you to make love to beautifull sexy women for a living. Yes, you might like making love to beautifull sexy women for a living BUT there is still a man with a gun behind you telling you what to do.
Say that this case was true for an entire nation, would you therefore conclude that this nation is entirely hetero OR might that country go homosexual the moment the man with the gun is removed.
EU efforts might very well result in them creating another muslim nation right on their doorstep.
The US has a city called philidelphia (or something) wich I believe is usually regarded as the most liberal of cities, (by US standards). Imagine this as Istanbul. Now imagine that phili is the capitol of the US and that the pentagon is making sure that phili politics are US politics. The US would seem to be far more "modern" then it really is, it might even allow gay marriages and such.
BUT the US ain't really that modern, there is the backward Bible Belt.
The father of all turks was a great man, BUT his rule is enforced through force. The question is what would happen when you remove that force.
Tell me, do americans in places like New York or LA etc feel that gay marriages should be outlawed? Nonetheless they are. Same with Turkey, just because Istanbul is the face of Turkey doesn't mean the body agrees with it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The US has a city called philidelphia (or something) wich I believe is usually regarded as the most liberal of cities
You misspelled "San Francisco."
Re:Turkey is the pinnacle of Islam. (Score:5, Insightful)
If there is so much as one Turk who chafes at the yolk of censorship, then they are wrong and we do not have to respect them (same goes for our own government, or any other form of majority-rule).
Of course, Thomas Jefferson doesn't go for much around here, any more, so take that as you will.
Re:Turkey is the pinnacle of Islam. (Score:5, Insightful)
Thomas Jefferson, statesman that he was, signed off on the document that decreed slaves were not people, but property and would count only as 2/3rds of a person for the purposes of representation. Never mind that the slaves, not being people, weren't represented anyway.
Jefferson knew that the time was not yet right. Had the U.S. Constitution mandated the end of slavery and full rights for ex-slaves, the Republic would have fallen apart and the Revolution would have been for naught. However, the seeds were sewn for that phrase you quoted to come to fruition when the time was ripe. In the case of slavery, it was almost a century later.
The time is not right in Turkey, or many other nations, for full freedom of speech. Like it or not, there are some very heated passions in that part of the world. They are forcibly integrating peoples and ethnic groups who don't want to be integrated, and that will take time. Generations, maybe centuries, will pass but to see thru their development as a modern, peaceful, enlightened, secular and democratic nation they believe the vision of the Ataturk is the best path. That vision is still young and fragile.
Formal membership in the E.U. will, I believe, shorten their transition time. Embrace and extend, if you like. Disintegration into separate ethnic and religious States is not in the best interest of the peoples of Turkey, nor in the best interests of Europe.
Push too hard, too soon and Turkey will break. Does Europe truly want a theocracy sitting on their doorstep?
Probably not going to invite them in... (Score:4, Insightful)
I think Europe would prefer a theocracy on their doorstep, then in their living room.
Turkey is not a theocracy (Score:4, Interesting)
Just what do you base this claim upon? Turkey is a democracy. It has its shortcomings. Care to get into an argument about a two-party stranglehold's effect on democratic processes?
Turkey is vehemently opposed to being forced to admit to Armenian genocide a century ago. At the same time, as many Turkish journalists have pointed out, France's stand against Turkey's admission into the EU because of this is certainly lest than virtuous, given that they have never owned up to their own more recent history in Algeria [turkishweekly.net].
The PKK is a group recognised by the US State Department as a terrorist organisation. After its leader Abdullah Ocalan, was captured by Turkish Special Forces in Kenya, many governments and groups protested his trial as unfair. The main reasons for this was that the trial was held in the Ankara State Security Court, which is ruled by a three judge panel in which a military officer is included as one judge, and that after his arrest, Ocalan was unable to be reached by attorneys for ten days. Compare and contrast these judicial flaws with the obscene US treatment of detainees, and the Guantanamo Show Trials in which any defendant allegations of torture are considered classified information?
In regards to the YouTube incident mentioned; it was quickly ruled as an unconstitutional act by a Turkish court, and its import was greatly inflated in the Western media. Read a Turkish editorial on the matter:
Barin Kayaoglu, "Defending YouTube or Defending Atatürk? [turkishweekly.net]", Journal of Turkish Weekly, 17 March 2007
Try expanding your knowledge, instead of depending upon others' prejudices for you bigotry.
Re:Turkey is the pinnacle of Islam. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm American, so I don't really have a horse in the race, and I disagree (mostly). You are probably correct that Turkey is not ready for full freedom of speech, religion, etc. It doesn't seem to be an issue that most Turks support strongly. I may be wrong on that, but that's certainly how it seems to me. However, the European Union must not under any circumstances budge in any of these instances.
The fact is that the EU already exists. It doesn't have to make the same decisions that the US had to make in order to ensure the survival of the government. They have dealt with insane countries at their border before (i.e. USSR, Yugoslavia, North Africa) and they can do so again. There is absolutely no need to make such a large compromise here, the EU is much better off without Turkey than Turkey without the EU. If it wants admittance, it must play by the rules completely. If that doesn't happen, then it doesn't happen. But this is an issue so important that the EU absolutely can't bend. If it takes fifty or a hundred years for Turkey to accept, then so be it. What's the point of even having freedoms spelled out in a constitution (or treaties, whatever it is that makes up EU law) if you're just going to write them off for a relatively small political and economic gain?
I'm foremost a pragmatist, but do you really want to undermine the very things the EU is supposed to protect? What really is the worth of having Turkey in the EU if it means giving up some of your own rights (nominally, sure but still)? What if EU laws concerning free expression of religion in Turkey actually causes radical Islam to *increase* its influence? It's not a given that membership in the EU will affect positive change in Turkey.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Turkey is the pinnacle of Islam. (Score:4, Interesting)
If Turkey fails, it won't disintegrate, it will explode and the result will be a regional war and instability for more than a generation. Think what would happen if Turkey split into rival groups of Kurds, Armenians, Islamist Turks and Secular Turks. That can't be allowed to happen.
Europe isn't compromising any of their values. They would be guiding a member along the path, knowing the long term benefit of brining Turkey into the fold outweighs the short term benefits of holding the hard line on their "convictions".
This isn't without precedent in the E.U. There are nations who haven't fully aligned subsidies, trade policies, tariffs and other laws fully. But, progress is being made and the E.U. is thinking long term. Patience is a virtue.
Re: Turkey, the E.U. and things to come (Score:3, Insightful)
If Turkey breaks up, we're talking the attempted formation of an independent Kurdistan, which traditionally spans parts of Turkey, Iraq, Armenia,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
France's law that makes it illegal to deny the Armenian holocaust is just as pointless and oppressive as this law being proposed in Turkey.
Re:Turkey is the pinnacle of Islam. (Score:4, Insightful)
You've got to be kidding me. For some reason I think the majority screwing over the minority and abusing their human rights isn't something that should be tolerated, much less respected. Human suffering is almost never acceptable and just because the majority of Turkey may not care about the rights of others who live in the country doesn't mean we shouldn't pressure Turkey into accepting "our Western values." If by "Western values" you mean respecting people's civil and human rights, then, yes, we should try to push those values on Turkey as much as possible.
none of our business (Score:4, Informative)
Well (and that's an example, no country is a saint in this matter), the USA have been preaching on freedom and human rights for decades. It didn't prevent them to install and maintain bloody dictatorships in South America. And that, way before the USA "turned evil" and bashing the US became an olympic sport.
I do not think we (well, the West) have any right at all to interfere in Turkey or any other country.
Personally I don't think Turkey belongs to EU, and that's a matter for EU and Turkey, and no one else.
The rest, the internal Turkey matters as long as they stay out of EU, are their business and we have no right to mess with.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
A very strong statement I have to say. Turkey is a country which is undergoing a lot of changes the last few years. It is torn between the Islamic fundamentalists and the military and its followers which follow the dream Mustafa Kemal Atatürk for a European Turkey. Turkey is also a 100 million people market which means that Europe needs its market. Washington pushes for Turkey to enter the European Union, firstly because they realise that if it happens, the dream of the European Union wont have much ho
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, dude - Truly beautiful troll there! You even got modded UP to +5 insightful!
I couldn't disagree more with what you've said, but you have my admiration for saying it so well. Kudos!
Re: (Score:2)
Voted out of EU (Score:2)
A few more of these and it wont be just the French telling them to bug off.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why? It isn't really the EU begging Turkey to join the union, but rather Turkey begging the EU to become a member.
Re: (Score:2)
Turkey doesn't bring anything to the table! EU would be better off without Turkey.
Having an official representative from Turkey telling EU to "Go fuck yourselves" would most certainly put an end to any membership negotiations.
But not that I care that much. My contry is not a member either. Though Norway -would- bring something to the table, were we to join EU.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like trying to get the UN to decided on what to have for lunch.
I, for one... (Score:3, Funny)
And I think the founder of modern Turkey is a turkey haha
Freedom of speech is pretty cool
I also question the principles of the American secular system, and i pretty much question the fuck out of everybody I see.
Re: (Score:2)
And I, for one...
(1999/2000 version) KISS YOU!
(1994/1995 version) ...sign you up for Serdar Argic's [wikipedia.org] HOWLING THROUGH THE WIRES [google.com], USENET World Tour!
Shit, I see we've already got a subthread on the Armenian Whathefuckevercide. Serdar still HOWLS!
Turkey is the source of two of the weirdest memes to ever hit the Internets. The Hungarians come in a close second with the Chuck Norris / Stephen Colbert [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Rights without responsibilites? (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, I take that back. China & the US would like to have free trade going into Europe, but not coming out. That would be silly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe that's because they're on the wrong side of the EU's protectionist agriculture tariffs.
Attaturk (Score:5, Interesting)
Armenians!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and ataturk was fighting in gallipoli during 1915.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2)
First, you seem to be under the impression that Muslims in general have accepted this seperation-of-state-and-faith as much as the Christians in Europe. The hard fact is that in every event that even REMOTELY resembles free elections, religious groups truimph (read Egypt, Palestine). The Muslim culture evolves around faith in many aspects, and as someone who has lived in
Re: (Score:2)
He's basically a demigod over there.
What's wrong with Europe? (Score:3, Insightful)
People are getting confused. You should tolerate the idea of free speech; you don't have to like what people say, you don't even have to listen. It's the right to speak, not the right to be heard or listened to.
These laws, including the Turkish positions, would be like if the US suddenly enacted laws saying that no one can speak of the Confederacy in a positive light and made it illegal to say the Confederacy actually won. Everyone knows they didn't, but people still say it. Everyone with an IQ over 20 just laughs at them, though. I'd just laugh & ignore at anyone who denied the Holocaust -- you should too, Europe (Germany, Turkey, et all).
Surprisingly, at least in the Holocaust issue, England is one of the few countries that put up a fuss last time it came up (2005). The same England that's hell bent on monitoring every street corner. C'est bizarre.
Re: (Score:2)
I understand that's not really what were talking about with Germany here, but a society can (and really must) have selective free speech.
Censorship works, and speaking of Holocausts... (Score:5, Informative)
The Turkish government really, really doesn't want to talk about this. Bring it up too forcefully in Turkey and it can get you killed [wikipedia.org]. So the subject is censored in Turkey, effectively enough that most of today's generation of Turks just can't believe that their great grandparents could have done anything so vile. I'd imagine that today's generation of Germans would have the same reaction if Germany hadn't been forced to face up to what the National Socialist German Workers Party did.
PBS did a pretty impressive special on the subject, available on DVD [shoppbs.org].
So... it's likely that the Turkish government will keep on censoring away. It's not like anyone's going to do anything effective about it. Sure, eventually they'll figure out that censoring the 'net is a fool's errand, but they'll kick that can down the road as long as they can. And even then, will enough Turkish citizens care enough to look?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I once had a very passionate debate with a friend of Turkish origin on the Illiad. She kept on insisting the author's name should be spelt Omar, and that he was Turkish.
Don't get me wrong, I _love_ Turkish culture and have a great amount of respect for Turkish traditions (and am still friends with that girl; will drop by her place when I'm in Istanbul), but it takes quite a bit of false history to change the ethnicity of a classical Greek poet. The current generation is, of course, worldy-wise and mostly o
i loe and support all terrorist (Score:2, Insightful)
Europe has just different frame, we had a problem with nazi and see their followers are a danger that worth a bit of lmitation of free speach.
I dont think lot of people would be allow to praise the 911 terrorists in US, encourage killing americans and soldiers, spitting of the victims of 911.
but i can be wrong
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It isn't exactly the most popular sentiment but there are plenty of people in the US who express exactly those ideas. The solution isn't to shut them up because that just makes it look like their idea of the "truth" is being hidden from the public. The solution is to debate them and thoroughly debunk them to prove them for the fools they are. Check out War
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Freedoms are weighted against each other.
For example,
If I try to brainwash my children and try to incite them to kill you,
and there is a small but reasonable probability that you will get killed as a result, the protection of human life trumps the freedom of speech.
If it was only a matter of academic blabber on holocaust denial
and drawing swastikas in an art exhibition it would not be a problem.
However it is associated with rise in
Re: (Score:2)
That simply is not true. In the US it absolutely is legal to 'incite hate'. Neo-nazi's, KKK, and all other manner of crazy fringe groups are allowed to freely distribute literature (calling it 'literature' might be a stretch) declaring that you should hate all the Jews, blacks, and Catholics. The only real line in the US is actively advocating murder. Even then, you need to be blatant. You can call for revolution without getti
Re:What's wrong with Europe? (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course you can.
The meaning of "Free Speech" can't be understood outside its historical, social and legal context.
In the U.S. it begins with open political debate without governmental interference -- or, more narrowly, without prior censorship. That didn't mean you weren't answerable in court later for language that could be taken as slanderous or seditious.
The rules evolve over time and they are not the same in every society.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since when do you judge an entire continent based on a single country (that is barely even on that continent)? Why aren't you saying "What's wrong with the Middle East" or "What's wrong with Asia?"? Turkey is in those regions just as much as it is in Europe. And Turkey are pretty out of sync with the rest of Europe when it comes to things like this, which is part of the reason why they are having such a hard time getting into the EU.
Re: (Score:2)
Ummm...wow. Entertaining statement.
You do realize that "the rest of Europe" in this context includes Iceland, the U.K., Ireland and... well, that is about it. Okay, Spain was run by Franco who was Hitler's bitch, and Albania was occupied by Italy -- again Hitler's bitch. Sweden and Switzerland were "neutral", but still, your statement is so fucked up it boggles the mind.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What's wrong with Europe? (Score:4, Insightful)
So my answer to your question "Think of it this way, do you think that someone who advocates the end of free speech as meritory of free speech benefits themselves?" is yes; the more you move to restrict their freedoms, the closer you get to becoming them yourself.
Re:What's wrong with Europe? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
"We can't let people who want to restrict speech into the government! That's why the government has to restrict speech!"
Dumbass.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to see a study (Score:4, Interesting)
In "free society" we generally abhor censorship. What people are afraid if is pretty obvious: that people will form opinions in opposition to current leadership. But are there societal health benefits? Is there something actually good about it?
Re:I'd like to see a study (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
But at the same time Nearly everyone in Switzerland has a gun, and crime rates are also low.
We own tons of guns here in Canada too... but they are LONG guns, not hand guns... mostly for hunting gophers etc. on farms. High levels of gun ownership in Switzerland is due to the small standing army and the reliance on militia which requires most men to maintain weapons at home. Unlike the United States however, there are strict gun control laws in Switzerland which mean that all these guns are registered and have strict conditions on their storage etc. They just aren't generally on hand for the heat-
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Different strokes (Score:2)
It is VERY ironic that, (Score:2)
Not surprising, really (Score:5, Insightful)
Another point to consider is that there is growing dissatisfaction with the idea of joining the EU. Basically Turkey has made major, major changes to the law and its government in an effort to get into the EU, but so far the process has been stalled by EU member states who are understandably wary (for a number of reasons) about letting Turkey in. Because of this, many Turkish citizens are now increasingly adopting a "kiss off" attitude towards EU membership and the EU itself. Perhaps this move is another sign of the frustration... a defiant gesture, if you will.
-PxB
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm. (Score:2)
another thing to consider (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i AM turkish. i LIVE in turkey.
you dont know whats going on around here these days. this is a precursor to a long-prepared law that will come later, which will give the government the right to censor "inappropriate" content. that law has been waiting for some time in the assembly now, due to public reaction. now, legalizing censorship first in a pretense that noone can object in ataturk matter, then they will push for the law thats already waiting.
I'm thinking that (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
EU? Turkey? (Score:2)
On top of that the EU regularly censors web material for a variety of reasons.
EU? I don't think so... (Score:2)
Not quite that simple (Score:5, Interesting)
Without draconian measures such as this censorship, the gap between the religious people and the guardians of secularism would rapidly increase to the point where you could expect an Islamic revolution like the one in Iran.
People forget how Ataturk made the country secular - by excessive bloodshed and repression. The majority of the Turks never wanted to be secular and are still very much opposed to it. The relevant question is: do you allow your democracy to self-implode? Do you allow the election of a party that will eliminate democracy completely - not to mention freedom of speech, secularism etc
So don't judge too harshly - they are in a tight spot.
Of course their whole arrangement makes joining the EU any time soon very unlikely. This in turn gives them a sense of rejection which pushes the country towards Islamic government. If on the other hand the EU supports their fight for secularism, which takes from as limits on civil liberties, it is betraying its own principles. Not an entirely trivial situation.
Re: (Score:2)
Which just goes to show how stupid religious people are.
Turkey has an economy that - despite its flaws - is the envy of the Muslim world, with comparatively high standard of living. And they are free to practice their religion, with the exception of forcing their daughters and wives to cover their sinful female faces while in government schools and jobs.
Yet there are millions in Turkey who would gladly throw away
Correction (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
it's more complex than most think (Score:2)
so in sum it seems less like people are really objecting less to the offense to the ideal of absolute free sp
A little info on demographics of Turkish politics (Score:3, Informative)
rest are divided among major groups like kemalists (ataturk nationalists), west supporters, (liberals, which generally have many stuff in common with kemalists, except in nationalistic matters like ataturk is a taboo or not, and freedom of speech related to that issue), a good deal of social democrats (which generally are almost transient with kemalists, since most of ataturk's proposed ideas and guidelines curiously coincides with social democracy, and the party he founded, chp, is a social democrat party for over around, say 70 or so years), extreme nationalists, which are basically right wing radicals, which are very considerable in numbers, but not on majority over any of the above groups.
the biggest groups are named "undecideds" in turkey.
these are people of mild composition, they dont want to mess with anybody or anything, want matters to be good and life normal, no crises, no stampede, economy in rails etc and such. they are generally approving of european values, becuse of humanitarian approaches (we are not talking about stupid extreme left wing idiots here, were talking Danton, Erasmus, Voltaire, Rousseau humanism & liberalism - though this population rarely knows these writers's names), quality of life in europe in particular. (thinking that europeans must be doing some things right). and they want in in european union, nomatter who says what. extreme right wing nationalists, islamic groups, and even portion of the kemalists who are disullisioned with europe and dont want to get into euo anymore dont even add up to the number of this "silent crowd".
these "undecideds", ironically, are the people whose votes decide who gets in power at any given time.
in the last elections, they were extremely disillusioned by the corruption earlier parties and governments exhibited, and some were impressed with the seemingly considerable work that was done by the people in municipial duties (who founded the akp later, and tayyip erdogan, current pm was the mayor of istanbul, islamic), so they said exactly like this; "lets try those islamists this time".
this was a sentence which was actually said by those people in debates, among family, friends and such.
and they voted for them. and voila, 38% votes for islamic party, and thanks to the election system that twists the votes SO absurd, they get 95% of the chairs in the assembly.
curiously, islamists also want to get into the eu. many fragments of islamic community thinks that it will be much too easier to spread islamic influence when turkey is in eu. and they are right, from what we see from the proceedings of a minority islamic population is able to succeed in netherlands, even in this state.
hence when in power, islamic party (akp) have pushed for eu reforms with unseen vigor in any prior government. and passed many laws to eu guidelines. as in all matters that comes too fast, too low a number of these laws are actually being practiced.
ah, i forgot one segment. that is the military.
it is a MAJOR segment of the population. in that it holds armed power, and also in that there are explicit items in constitution that ordains the army "guardianship of secular democratic regime".
and for the last 80 years, they have been EXACTLY doing that.
back around 1960, an islamically inclined prime minister, Adnan Menderes, and his then center-right and extreme-right composured party (demokrat parti, which is curiously the party that the roots and many members of the akp or other right/islamically inclined parties come from), have gone rather awkward, started censoring the media in the wake of increasing critisizm for failure, BANNE
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
WHO is going to define what is "morally detrimental" to the "Children" ?
what defines morally detrimental ? as with the current law in turkey ANYTHING that is critisizing the state can be placed as "morally detrimental" to upbringing of the children.
and thats what exactly they are wanting to do. islamic government wants anything not in line with islam removed from access.
and as for sabah, it was not sabah that was propagating that shit about "clean internet". it was hurriyet and mil
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you are aware that there is no such thing as "current law in Turkey" about this, as you put it. If you read the news article carefully you'll see that it's only a proposition.
no you are not aware of there are many things such as "current laws in turkey".
301, which is an item in the constitution that requires state and courts to punish whomever insults or degrades ataturk, and turkish nat