Sour Times
I agree, Claire Berlinski’s essay in World Affairs Journal, “Turkish Delight: A Sour Delicacy”, IS good! Wonderfully written and spot-on.
I never planned to live in Istanbul. Like so many things in my life, it just wound up that way. From my window I see massive and glittering cruise ships setting sail on the Golden Horn, sunrise over the Topkapı Palace, glowing like fire, tankers coming down from Odessa, pleasure craft coming up from the Sea of Marmara. I read somewhere that having a beautiful view adds years to your life expectancy.
My relationship with Turkey is not unambivalent, however. Lately, I have been walking down the street and wondering if the warm, kindly people I’ve long known as my neighbors—pudgy Uncle Mehmet, who sells pens at the corner store—are nodding with satisfaction at the scenes on the news of their fellow Turks waving Hamas flags, calling for the eradication of the Zionist Entity, and driving the visiting Israeli basketball team from the court with anti-Semitic curses. They probably are.
My friendships here have come under strain since the recent war in Gaza. Some of my Turkish friends have proved shockingly credulous, willing to absorb every crude slander they hear about Israel on the news and in the street. I’ve fallen out bitterly with Turks whom I viewed, until now, as liberal, Westernized moderates. And in fact, some of my Turkish friends have fallen out with their Turkish friends, having fallen victim to the same error.
That there has been an outpouring of anti-Semitism in Turkey recently should come as a surprise to no one; there has been an outpouring of anti-Semitism around the globe, as there is every time the Israeli-Palestinian conflict goes hot. But it did surprise me to discover it among friends whom I thought particularly unlikely candidates for these sentiments. I have been forced to realize that I didn’t know them—or Turkey—as well as I thought… (click here for the rest)
I tell you this. Years back. I am in middle school. We’re visiting with my uncle and his family who live in another town (quite afar from us). We’re taking a stroll with my cousin, a few years older than me. He is telling me about Jews. How all ills of the world is their making, etc. I am skeptical, and to counter my skepticism, he pulls the punch: “Wait, your father will sit with you and tell all about it to you. Then you’ll believe me.”
.
Needless to say, maybe, my father never did such thing. Hence my incredulity…
Let’s see what reactions I’ll get for calling the king naked. [Indeed, this'll be lucky if it even gets published]
Here is couple of paragraphs from Wikipedia on ‘Politics of Israel’.
Count it. There are 7 words derived from ‘Zion’ in those two paragraphs.
Let’s just check what Wikipedia says about ‘Zionism‘.
Obviously, ‘Zionism’ isn’t an entirely religious term anymore. There does exist secular Zionists who are downright racist, while the devout ones are religious fanatic nuts; yet both lead to the same end: “Israel belongs to Jews and no one else!”
[BTW, I just checked the 'Turkey' article in Wikipedia for any 'Turan' word under 'Politics of Turkey' heading; and guess what? There is neither that word nor the 'Politics of Turkey' heading.]
So, if the word ‘Israel’ basically equals ‘Zionism’ and both, in turn, mean racist fascism; just how do they manage to call everyone that notices/raises this simple fact an anti-Semit(ist)?
Well.. that is the knack I admire of Jews in general.
At least in the Western world, there’s this confusion with the word ‘Jewish’: It isn’t clear whether you’re referring to a race of a religion; and the Jews use/exploit this to the full potential to call you a racist even when you’re criticizing their religion-based/inspired politics. [In Turkish, 'Yahudi' means the Jewish race, whereas 'Musevi' means Jewish religion].
And, simply because ‘Israel is Jewish State’ [by their (racist) definition], if you criticize Israel (Zionism), you’re automatically branded as anti-Semitist (i.e. against Jews as race).
They have been milking that cow for far too long –and, Berlinski is just another one playing the same old ‘cambaza bak’ game.
If it’s fair to treat Turkey with tar and feathers on article 301 (Turkishness), and it is; I think it is high time we do the same to Israel.
Jews all around the world need to decide whether people of Israel (including any and everyone living there) are Israelis or only Jews pursuing Zionist ideals and ideologies all the way up to the borders of the ‘Promised Land’ and beyond.
If they (any Jew in or out of Israel) fully identify with Israel’s Zionist policies and call everyone protesting against Israel’s actions (and show it by driving the visiting Israeli basketball team from the court) an anti-Semitist, they need their heads fixed.
Same goes for those who find their ‘cambaza bak’ arguments plausible.
[BTW, I haven't even touched the issue of Israel being a Sharia-ruled (non-secular) state. Israel doesn't STILL have a constitution just because it would mean word of man being above word of Lord. And, they have Rabbinical, Sharia and various Canonical courts (religious) too.]
CA, we’re also told Turkish fighter-bombers pass over Istanbul skies to bomb what she claims to be innocent villagers in Northern Iraq (I thought the criticism at the time was they were bombing desolate mountains and the show wouldn’t accomplish much.). This is the kind of licence Berlinski takes as she informs people about the goings on. I believe you too live in Istanbul, have you noticed those cat-scaring flights over Istanbul? I haven’t. Spot-on, indeed.
.
Anyway, you say
.
Jews all around the world need to decide whether people of Israel (including any and everyone living there) are Israelis or only Jews pursuing Zionist ideals and ideologies all the way up to the borders of the ‘Promised Land’ and beyond.
.
I disagree. Jews all around world can do what they please. What you are saying makes no more sense to me than saying Turks (here or abroad) should decide this or that. We find it easy to distance ourselves from what the Turkish state does even though we live here, have the right ID paperwork, and perhaps even benefit from the things we disagree with. Why pick on Jews in general, or as individuals? It isn’t like the Jews who are politically active and do take positions against the policies of the state of Israel have been effective so far.
.
If they (any Jew in or out of Israel) fully identify with Israel’s Zionist policies and call everyone protesting against Israel’s actions (and show it by driving the visiting Israeli basketball team from the court) an anti-Semitist, they need their heads fixed.
.
Jewish or not, such people do exist and the low-lives in our press — especially when targeting Western audiences — parrot that kind of stuff. That said, I do remember the thing about that basketball game, and I consider it a disgrace. The Turkish police does know how to control crowds, it looked like they simply chose not tocontrol that particular one that time around. I dislike that and ostensibly I have a say in what this government does. If, OTOH, somebody looked at that event, took your tone and tried to tell me ‘I need to decide’ I’d simply tell them off. Of course, Turks this Turks that kind of generalizations do fly among people who claim to be high intellectuals and many people do resort to them. People do not fear the risk of being called anti-Turkish like they fear being called anti-Semites. I don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing either.
This is an article full of superficial if not orientalist observations and agenda or fact bending. Let’s start:
1.
“There has been an outpouring of anti-Semitism around the globe, as there is every time the Israeli-Palestinian conflict goes hot”
Lovely. Defining the Gaza offensive as ‘Israeli-Palestinian conflict going hot’. Gives a clue about the tone of the rest of the article. Duly noted.
2.
Somalia is a very bad example; because civilian killings or the atrocity of the war itself is not the issue re. the Israeli crimes. It’s the audacity to get away with whatever you commit. And it’s a very ugly rhetoric as well: “See, there are crimes against humanity everywhere; so why are you picking on us?”
Having said that, her juxtaposition of Palestinian suffering with the Kurdish uprising is not irrelevant. Nevertheless, the hypocrisy of Turkish government(s) and Turkish people cannot give the chance for the Israeli government to get away with murder. It just gives the chance to remind Turkey that their hands are also covered with blood.
3.
This exploitation of the Hamas charter dated back to 2006 is also getting old. The same ‘charter plaintiffs’ always tend to ignore various ‘realpolitik’ Hamas statements that Israel is not by definition a non-negotiable state. ‘Geçiniz’ we say in Turkish.
4.
Regarding the feeling of insecurity of Istanbul, there is indeed such an existence, but unlike the post-Weimar German romanticism, the Turkish romanticism refers to a pre-national golden age. Murat Belge’s “Genesis” is a good starter to understand the difference. That’s why Turkish nationalism has always been a travesty: Referring to a golden age and despising it at the same time created a schizophrenic mindset. You can still observe traces among both most Islamists –who are no less nationalists than the MHP line- and the far-right. So, what happens in Istanbul now is the unearthing of that travesty. Guilt –population exchange, pogroms, nationalisation of the Ottoman capital- has to be covered by pumped feeling of righteousness. That’s now how it developed in Weimar Germany.
To sum it up, it looks like another cheap effort to try to establish an analogy between the Nazis and the emerging Turkish system.
Yes, anti-Semitism exists in Turkey, but this is an import, glued to the society, yet functioning thanks to the success of nationalist doctrine of the late 20s. Don’t’ blame it on Islamists though.
Geçiniz.
5.
Erdogan’s temper in Davos was deliberate? Thanks to time you spent in Turkey, I guess you’re sufficiently ‘getürkt’ to refer to conspiracies.
I’m happy to have waited for one year to comment on this ridiculous article; because ‘Turkey’s desperate need for IMF’ is now officially another flop to the Thatcher lover author.
Sorry I don’t have more time or enjoyment to sustain this; but my life is too short for that.
Nihat,
I agree that it is not totally irrelevant. But [and, there's always a 'but'], the similarity doesn’t go far.
Here is why: I don’t see any high ranking Palestinians either in the bureaucracy or in the government of Israel, whereas the same cannot be said about Turkey.
In Israel, you either are a Jew or you are a nobody.
Actually, if you’re not a Jew, you’re a ‘goim’ which means ‘uncelan’ [according to Talmud].
With such a time-honored religious and cultural background, I am not at all surprised to see that there’s practically non-existent opposition in Israel to ‘goims’ being fair game for cleansing.
Sorry. No, not Nihat. It should have been Ertank.
BM,
But, all freedoms have a price tag.
If, for example, they keep trying to pull wool over people by, for example, conveniently substitute Semitism when in fact it is Zionism, there’s real chance that they will lose all credibility.
And, as far as I am concerned, they have exhausted pretty much all of it.
AFAIC, I am not ‘picking on Jews’ at all.
If anything, I am ‘picking on Israel’.
What I find unbearably disturbing is that most (almost all) Jews identify with Israel to such point that they will interpret/take any criticism/protest of Israel as personal insults, and snap back with irrelevant defenses/attacks/accusations invariably boiling down to how the Jews suffered under Nazi Germany and how awful Holocaust was etc etc.
That, to my ears, sound nothing other than revenge. What’s worse, they are making the wrong people –the Palestinians– expiate for it.
AFAIC, no amount of Holocaust narrative can cover up that fact.
Turkey is fast becoming like an aggrieved, insecure, puny and primitive Arab country. The likes of Mustafa Akyol love this, but this is a tragedy for Turkey. Unfortunately, Turkish people were not able to live up to the standards set by Ataturk. They prefer to be Middle Easterners, not Europeans. In this case, Turks have no reason whatsoever to complain about being rejected b Europe. The Turkey of erdogans, mustafa akyols, gulens, etc, is NOT welcome in Europe!
I’m really surprised to see someone as insightful, knowledgeable about Turkey and talented at writing as Jennie White praising this wrong-headed, rambling and often offensive article. On a couple of its points:
Turkey is far from being the only place – or the only milieu (think of the European left) – where the Israel-Palestine conflict attracts seemingly disproportionate attention. Antisemitism is one possible element of the reasons for this (and clearly exists in Turkey) but it’s far from the only one. Yet the author makes little or no attempt to differentiate between criticism of antisemtism and criticism of Israel, which even when unjustified or over the top is far from necessarily the same thing. Nor is the Israel-Palestine conflict the only issue in its field in the world to receive disproportionate attention; look at the world media’s heavy focus on the supposed rigging of the Iranian elections and anti-democratic and supposedly militarised nature of Iran, while other blatantly rigged elections and far less democratic regimes including various effective military dictatorships in the region and further afield get little or no attention. This isn’t down to anti-Persian sentiment alone, or even at all. While the author’s friends reaction to her comment about the conflict in Somalia is repugnant, it is true worldwide, and not just in Turkey, that Africa is frequently viewed as a mess of a place where life is cheap. It is after all the author’s native country that gives more to Israel in military/security aid annually than it does to the whole of Africa in humanitarian aid.
The Hamas charter was written more than 20 years ago, when the organisation first came into existence; while there remains much to abhor about the organisation, it has evolved enormously since then and it is wrong-headed to judge it by a document written by one fringe of the organisation when it was tiny and unsophisticated. In any case regardless of the impression the media gives, recent polls have shown very little Turkish support for Hamas. Furthermore for all the merits of this draft Israeli constitution (she doesn’t bother to make clear who even wrote this and how much popular and official support it has – I doubt much given the political and religious sensitivities over establishing a constitution in Israel), it would be of little good to the millions of Palestinians in the Palestinian Territories who have been under Israeli military rule for the last forty years deprived of the protections of Israeli law, or the millions more in other countries deprived of their homes.
As others have pointed out, Turkey isn’t desperately in need of IMF aid, and while probably in worse economic shape than the authorities would have you believe, is in far far better shape than the economy under previous governments. Furthermore the downturn here was largely a result of the global downturn. The “Potemkin” economic miracle she refers to has seen per capita income rise significantly since the AKP came to power, even if it took much of its economic agenda from Kemal Dervis and the likes of the IMF.
The author blames Erdogan for having pre-planned his remarks to Peres long before he went to Davos, but then says they were partly aimed to detract attention from a snub at Davos. The author makes no mention of Shimon Peres talking down to Erdogan before Erdogan’s outburst. She says that Erdogan is trying to tap into the huge vein of extremist sentiment supposedly associated with Saadet supporters but ignores Saadaet’s consistently pathetic polling numbers. She repeatedly describes Erdogan in terms such as ruffian and from the gutter, perhaps adopting thedeeply unpleasant elite prejudice and contempt for the non-elite “black Turks” that probably most of her upperclass Turkish friends hold. She dismisses in half a sentence the prejudices held by other parts of the political spectrum as something AKP supporters like to point out to deflect criticism, doing scant justice to the abhorrent attitudes on display from prominent CHP leaders to Armenians and so on. She rightly criticises Erdogan’s nationalistic outbursts but ignore that he has also made far more gestures towards minorities in Turkey than any other major Turkish political leader. She eschews analysis of the genuine puzzle of Erdogan’s veering between liberalism and nationalism in favour of cheap propaganda.
There are many things to criticize about both popular attitudes and prejudices in Turkey (across the political spectrum) and about the AKP. But this poor excuse of an essay is a miserable attempt at capturing them.
CA,
.
What I find unbearably disturbing is that most (almost all) Jews identify with Israel to such point that they will interpret/take any criticism/protest of Israel as personal insults, and snap back with irrelevant defenses/attacks/accusations invariably boiling down to how the Jews suffered under Nazi Germany and how awful Holocaust was etc etc.
.
This has not been my experience (either with Turkish or American Jews). Many of the more visible organizations identifying themselves as Jewish do appear to be acting as you say though. We also know and see (non-Jewish) people here — who appear to care about not offending the prevailing attitudes and reflexes of the politically powerful classes in the US — parrot much of the ‘ooo lookie here’s another anti semite’ kind of nonsense. If you have those people in mind, then I see what you mean. Then again, I wouldn’t want to be judged by the behaviour of many of the visible Turkish organizations much less be told what decisions I’d have to make. I don’t wish that on Jews (ours or not) either.
Stamboul,
.
I’m really surprised to see someone as insightful, knowledgeable about Turkey and talented at writing as Jennie White praising this wrong-headed, rambling and often offensive article.
.
That was surprising to me when I started reading this blog too, now I have come to expect it. I don’t know the mechanism behind it, I sometimes think perhaps social scientists’ minds work in such a way as to produce undue praise with somewhat lowish standards when dealing with non-academic work. Of course I have no experience or background to gauge this, it is just a hunch. In regular science and engineering you get so used to getting slapped around by nature itself, math and colleagues armed with solid evidence (or by the machine if you deal with computers) that you develop a reflex that makes you go ‘is this really so?’ when you read a piece of well-written prose that you — for one reason or other — are inclined to like. Social science work seems to be getting done at too high a level for such short paths to solid evidence or reasoning and somewhat automatic and easily learnable/transferable mechanisms to exist.
Bulent,
The standards of social sciences, in principle, are not that low. It is just there is a tendency both in Turkey and the US to invite people close to certain religious communities (either physically or ideologically) to lecture others on social phenomena, particularly on what is “really” going on in Turkey. I understand why this is so in Turkey but what disappoints me is that academic institutions in the US also participate in this trend. As a result, we are faced with “journalists/columnists/cartoonists/tarikat leaders lecturing us as historians, political scientists and sociologists on political processes, movements, reforms, historical events and even the future based on anecdotal evidence and wishful thinking. It is a massacre of social sciences under the disguise of “freedom of speech”. I wonder if I could make such similar statements based on my high school knowledge on biology or chemistry, and how far would I go with it? Who knows? perhaps one day I can do better than the Kansas School Board.
BM,
I suppose, this is one of those things one would like to be the opposite of what real life dictates.
What I mean is, in any established industry, if you’re at all wise, you don’t go around openly calling spades spades –unless you have water proof and rock solid evidences.
There’s a simple reason for that: Those ‘spades’ might not like it and, in turn, may start calling you names. The ensuing confusion and cacophony, might cost you more than you gain –in terms of credibility, customers, sales or profits.
For those fond of car analogies, the behavior of automotive industry is exemplary here: Never openly and directly point out what your competitors are doing wrong –employ journalists or other similar hitmen for that.
You might even praise a manufacturer who isn’t in your market, hoping that they do the same for you.
IOW, assuming she has some business acumen, it is perfectly understandable –when she has a new book published– why JW should feel the need to praise an obscure author: It’s now Elif Safak’s turn.
CA, I wrote the paragraph you quoted about Stamoul’s reaction to Jenny’s praise of Berlinski’s dated article. The article came up because Parviz linked to it elsewhere I believe. Perhaps you have posted under the wrong topic and the wrong conversation? Even if that is not the case, I would agree that Berlinski’s article in question is well-written and was fun to read. That would have been enough (for me, anyway) for praising a piece of fiction, but not for an article about actual things in the actual world. Are you thinking that the praise wasn’t about the article but was about the person herself who also happens to write books?
Cingoz,
.
As a result, we are faced with “journalists/columnists/cartoonists/tarikat leaders lecturing us as historians, political scientists and sociologists on political processes, movements, reforms, historical events and even the future based on anecdotal evidence and wishful thinking. It is a massacre of social sciences under the disguise of “freedom of speech”.
.
It is funny you say that because we were told here — after objecting to the praise about a particular lecturer — that we didn’t understand “freedom of speech.” I took it, at the time, simply as a bit of disingenuous retort and not as a serious reason (ie we were not talking about the Hyde Park Speakers’ Corner).
.
That said, I actually happen to agree that people whose past or qualifications do not quite fit the dispassionate academic stereotype should be given platforms in institutions of higher learning so people there get to find out whatever it is they are about. For example (this also came up here), in the case of creationism I think it is a mistake for Turkish universities to mimic the US ones and refrain from letting such people to talk (now they are getting hired as faculty, but that’s for another day). I don’t say this because I think various kinds of creationism have anything to do with science. I say it because when you have an organized bunch doing that kind of damage to some of the very people that you are tasked with the duty to teach science, there are valuable insights to be gained from some kind of engagement. What I would object to would be things like the university actually providing the apologetics for whatever pundit they are giving a platform to. Anyway, we appear to have agreement on that given your reference to the certain folks lecturing others on “what is really going on in Turkey.”
.
In other words, it is fine for people to lecture and their work be examined as specimens as an aid in understanding a particular phenomenon. It is for a reason like that I try to follow FG’s Friday sermons in Zaman and his writings in his site for example. I recommend people do that for the various (Gulen funded or not) pundits/papers/publications also (in Turkish) for roughly the same reason. These people exist, they have things to say, large crowds are influenced if not controlled by them and they are getting increasingly dominant. This approach is different than treating them as truth-tellers and letting them set the framework for the discourse that’s supposed to be about getting at aspects of the truth.
I always get amused when 2 billion Mohamedans are starting deliberating over ‘those 20 million Jews’.
I am afraid that I am with Parviz in this one
BM,
My post was inspired by both the Safak topic and the link to (followed by the in-your-face endoresement of) the Berlinski article.
I have always been a ‘form-follows-function’ person. IOW, unless I am reading a peiece of prose/poetry/fiction that has obviously been written for ‘form’ only; I cannot bring myself around to praising it.
Claiming that would go well beyond my intention (as well as my telephathic powers of reading what JW might have been thinking at the time).
What can be more meaningful can be boiled down to either “if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing” [hence, anything you say is nice --by definition]; or, “why create enemies when what you do need is more friends”.
Neither of these would be fair enough reasons to send anyone to Coventry. It is just that, as I don’t have similar constraints, I don’t feel the need to butter up subpar works.
It was an unnecessary exercise, but I checked who that enlightened journalist friend of Berlinski’s was. The one who shocked her by his “You wonder why they hate you?” article. It was none other than the great MA.
Nihat, nicely done, for something utterly unecessary. For another unnecessary exercise you might want to see if MA managed to get gov’t sponsorship for travel/appearance of another Berlinski. Perhaps a family friend? Here: http://www.thewhitepath.com/archives/2007/03/turkeys_first_intelligent_design_conference.php
[...] in 2009, which is still relevant today in 2010. For counter arguments and critique you can view Jenny White’s Comment page to this post. I never planned to live in Istanbul. Like so many things in my life, it just wound [...]
How brutal of Mustafa A. to guestioning the Turkis mindset. I’m still his friend although he and I don’t share ideologies. What we share is ‘common sense’. And Reason. At least he challenges the establishment and the corrupt and lazy ‘intelectual’ mindset of Turkey with their ‘hollowness’ and love for Fantasy and Conspiracies, to avoid any interaction with reality and universal science.
Twenty million Jewish people and 1.8 billion . Mohammedans, see science in general, literature, arts, media, finance, whatever…what inspires more? The Dead zealot ideology of the Mohammedans (followers of Mohammed who declared that his father Allah became ‘Allah’) or that of universal in origin peaceful religions as Christianity, Buddhaism, Taoism, Hindoism, Confuciusm, etc. God only knows, but I am sure that God was, is not and never will be on the side of the Mohammedans. salute
And, you think that’s something?
One fool can ask more questions than a thousand wise men cannot answer. The knack is to find the answers.
{It did sound like a Chinese proverb, didn’t it. It isn’t. It belongs to an Israeli friend of mind.}
That’s good to hear. I liked the tone too: You’re “still his friend”; meaning it’s expiring fast?
I always knew/hoped you’d come round someday.
I see. You have a ‘sense’ that is common to two of you.
That is where you fail, I am afraid.
All he is trying to do is to translate the stuff he hears in certain circles.
The only reason I am not calling it plagiarization is due simply to the fact that he is such a lousy translator that adds too much random noise to the original –but, I am yet to find something to account for his hollowness.
I really would like to stay and listen to your sermon; but –as my concept of ‘God’ does not meddle with the day to day lives of people the way yours does–, I am not sure we can strike a meaningful common ground.
The charge leveled against MA here was that he spoke/revealed the Turkis [sic] mindset, so to speak, shocking an uninitiated friend, not that he questioned it.
Bulent,
Thank you for reminding me that incident. That is exactly the kind of massacre of science under the disguise of freedom of speech I am criticizing. The venue is not a speech at Hyde Park as you stated. Participants will assume and justifiably expect that the guest speaker’s credentials exceed or at least match various and in principle strict standards. I expect higher standards from universities when they invite “lecturers”. The US’ sympathy for underdogs, I guess, finds its way to academia. Or perhaps it is another “Bon pour L’Orient” approach as I think you suggested in one of your earlier comments.
However, I agree with you on following various pundits/papers/publications for the purpose of understanding a particular phenomenon. They should not be banned, censored, or intimidated. They should be challanged, debated, explored, discussed and etc. However, what makes me suspicious is that these activities are usually organized in the form of a propaganda. There is limited debate in these forums by experts on the topic. I remember – as you again reminded me – our amazing know-it-all MA’s (another example of what we discussed in Elif “Shafak” discussion) conference on intelligent design.
It was a perfect example of “korler sagirlar birbirini agirlar” yet marketed and exported as a leap forward in Turkish scientific development. As far as I know, MA does not advocate that anymore largely because the ID lost its popularity in the US. But I guess this is related to what you mentioned: “Popularity in the West is getting leveraged into influence domestically.” That is very disturbing indeed.
Hans,
I cannot agree more with CA regarding MA bringing some “reason” and “logic” to Turkish lazy mindset. Just read couple of his articles, which are full of sheer AKP propaganda and cliche challenges geared more towards an uninformed Western market. My personal favorite is his historical comparative analyses that are stripped out of their historical, political and social context to support his arguments that are almost always framed around a struggle between the fascist Kemalists versus peace-loving tolerant “islamo-liberals”. If you accidentally sneeze, I am sure he can find a way to connect it to the Nazi party or some vaguely interpreted Quaranic verse (depending on where the argument goes) to support his argument. It cannot be a simple allergy.
I think it is more subtle than that: It is not ‘AKP propaganda’; it looks more like part of a joint attempt to steer AKP in the desired direction.
I must admit, that coalition has been quite successful so far.
Don’t know about the Nazi connection, but there definitely is one with Islam: See Al-Adab al-Mufrad Al-Bukhari by Imam Bukhari.
Careful, though: Should you find it meaningless/boring, whatever you do, please refrain from yawning. Unless, that is, you wish to be named an Apostle of Shaytan (the Devil).
CA # Cingoz:
Let me say it different: as long as I don’t see another columnist writing something original, he stays as one of my favorites. Next to Burak Berdil. And don’t patronize the ‘uninformed’ West market. USA and Europe are different, and he seems popular in the USA, not in Europe where he’s considered as some kind Tariq Ramadan, a guy who I support to be stoned in Mecca.)!
And Mustafa, as long as I can say in his face that he’s talking nonsense, especially when he talks about Islam, Arabs, Women etc. without that he’s is insulted like 98.% of the Turkish people, he stays my friend.)
My comments on HDN are signed with YABANCHiSTANBUL….and I am very carefully what I write regarding that idiotry/censorship there!
Hans,
I found only one reference to that name in the whole Google universe.
.
Who is that guy?
.
What gems of wisdom has he poured out?
.
And, where?
I have read some/couple of your comments.
.
I could see that censorship makes you write a lot more sensibly.
.
It is a shame, then, that JW does not apply censorship to your comments here.
Cingoz,
.
I expect higher standards from universities when they invite “lecturers”.
.
Well, this is not what we see so the expectations need modification. I’d say we’d also need to understand whatever it is that went awry and mislead us. I don’t particularly care about who lectures where, BTW, but for the case in question, I did find the ensuing bits of interaction interesting.
.
The US’ sympathy for underdogs, I guess, finds its way to academia.
.
In what sense is anyone praised here an underdog?
.
Or perhaps it is another “Bon pour L’Orient” approach as I think you suggested in one of your earlier comments.
.
I don’t remember the context but in general I do see (not solely or necessarily Jenny) people heaping praise on Turks and Turkish organizations of the kind they would probably fight tooth and nail in their own (Western) countries. I’d also look out for (Turkish or not) people employed by think-tanks in the US. There’s a tendency here to take stuff originating from the US too seriously as evidenced by both the efforts sunk into getting favorable coverage from the press there and the tendency to write for that audience. (See here for an example that made me laugh. Also note that how easily stepping out of line about Israel triggers bewilderment followed by the anti-semite accusations from Americans who seem to think that folks here who otherwise try hard to please are confined to American intellectuals’ self-imposed and rather ridiculous limits.)
I have come up with a seemingly simple non-math problem.
.
I am hoping people here will help me solve it.
.
Here it is:
.
– Given that you do not have a hidden agenda; and that you’re free to pick any topic you like from Israel or Jewish world.
.
– Find a way (or a particular wording) such that your criticism will be construed solely as anti-Zionism and not anti-Semitism.
.
To prove that this is NOT an unsolvable problem, can anyone think of an example?