Mr. Prime Minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
I have often written about how Turkey stands at a fork in the road where if you lead Turkey down one path, you will be seen as a greater leader than Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, "modern" Turkey's founder. I have noted several things in particular that would afford you such greatness. One is dealing forthrightly with the Kurds. Another is squarely facing Turkey's history vis-a-vis the Armenians. In both cases, Turkey should always apply the utmost in nonviolent conflict-resolution methods. Turkey, you, should set the highest standards for peacemaking and historical revisionism. I wrote those things before the current Syrian violence. I wrote them primarily on the heels of the Mavi Marmara.
While I openly advocated that the passengers on the Mavi Marmara not resort to violence, even if in self-defense, I openly denounced, and still do, the Zionists' clear murder of nine Turkish citizens and the continuing blockade of Gaza.
Mr. Erdogan, this information from Ayse Berktay, of the World Tribunal on Iraq, who is currently being held in prison in Turkey and by your orders, does not bode well for you. If she has accurately portrayed the situation (and I have no reason at this point to disbelieve her in general, secular, and common political terms), then your administration and you have made a grave error.
Allowing people openly and peacefully to debate and protest and the like is not an evil thing. What it requires is for you to be persuasive without resorting to what you insist they must not resort to: violence and such coercion.
You do not believe that Ayse Berktay is a terrorist or terrorist supporter or facilitator. The fact is, and you know it, Ayse Berktay is an anti-terrorist by virtue of the principles she has outlined. I am not saying that I know her positions well enough to be able to say that she is a pacifist under all circumstances. What I can say though is that it is highly unlikely that she has advocated or promoted, directly or indirectly, the violent overthrow of the government of Turkey where Turkey is being earnest about adhering to the principles you have claimed: fully informed democracy. You may disagree with her regarding finer points, but afford her the opportunity to make her case in public and not from behind bars. Then respond with your own facts via the same or other forums. Convince your followers and others under those conditions and do the other things I've mentioned. Then you will be on the path to greatness. Don't do what I'm saying here, and you will not go down in greatness and you will be harming Turkey in the short term and long term.
You have wanted to be a positive example for the Arab Spring and for Iran and every other country in the world. Then be that example. Order your government to immediately process and release people, such as Ayse Berktay. Meet with Ayse Berktay. Listen to her. Address her grievances as fairly as you are able. Do likewise concerning all such prisoners. Then I will be able to write that you are a great example to the world of a leader striving mightily for fundamental fairness and the good of all, which I truly want to be able to do.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)