First of all my great sympaties to the little girl.
At the same time I am baffled while you are critiziing the secular mind set and its loyal apparatchiks, at the same time You are re-iterating your pledge of allegience to the some sort of oath which is the core of secular belief to be more explicit to the Kemalist idiealogy "Ne Mutlu Turkum Diyene".
It is kind of awkward for some one like you mention this slogan which is embeded into the brain of every citizen of Turkey forcibly. This is one of the reason Turkey has so much difficulty to deal the realities of our time.

Kemalism idealogy is secularism itself. You can not seperate one from the other. It is the most sinister of idealogies of all . At times even uses religion, as it happened it used Sunni religion against alevi faith now using the alevi against the Sunnis. If I am correct now the secularist apparatchiks are saying " The alevis are some kind inusrance policy for the Republic"
It is no wonder M. Kemal's Portrait is hanged next to Hz. Ali's Portrait in most of "Cem Evleri"

Anyway there were no cem evi existed before 1980 or earlier. Most of the "cem evleri" mushroomed after late 1980. As a child in early 1950 in my village in eastern Anatolia we alvis were so fearful the Kemalist state our relgion rituals were in held in most possible secrecy. When we used to have a mass ( ciwat) some body in the village had to be on the look out in case the "Jandarma" the military police would bust the village. We had to conceal our identiy everyday in daily life. It was taboo to be an alevi,we faced all sorts of discriminations, abuse and insult. Remember in mid 1990 one of the news anchors in Star TV ridiculing one alevi person.
This was the secular mind set Kemalist idealogy on display. These apparatchiks now see danger and want to have mass strength so there for they are organzing the alevis through cem evleri and making them to believe the progresive minded people like Erdogan are the real threat.
Where all those crowds at the mass emonstrations organized by CHP and arym in the wake of presedential and general elections come from? Most of them were alevis.
Further more they are mixing religion with ethnicity and making the Kurdish Alevis to believe they are the real Turks who came from Horasan.

The real danger facing Turkey now is not those people who ware headscarf because of their beliefs, Not those on the mountains fighting Turkey's denial of Kurds, It is not secret foreign imperial plans on Turkey. It is the Kemalist Idealogy. The Kemalist idealogy is in denial of our times. It is in denial of realities of our times. There for it will not last so long
It will end. As we exprienced in our life time most of idealogy based nations could not stand the strong will of faith justice freedom and liberty. Nothing will stand against an individual beliefs for the great divine, liberty and justice.
I look forward for more clarity on these subjects
NK-New York-USA

Thank you for raising your voice for justice for all!
The above article accurately summarizes the biggest flaw of the regime in Turkey.If we are to become a 'full democracy,' we,as a nation,have to face our 'constructed/artificial fears' and demand freedom for every lifestyle,not only the ones 'approved by the regime.'
Sevgi

Mustafa,

You are right, people should be able to think, act, dress, etc. freely within the boundaries of democracy, that is, as long as the actions of one's self do not interfere with the freedom of others.

However, there is one extremely important factor: Islam and democracy are not compatible. You are mentioning the fascists, but Islam is the most totalitarian system, resting the absolute power in the hands of Allah, and allowing the representatives of Allah to use the power vested in them by Allah to rule in the most autocratic fashion possible. Other religions are essentially the same, but they were modified to fit the modern society. Where is democracy in that? Can anyone answer me? Show me a predominantly Muslim state that can be classified democratic at the same time... There is none, and there can be none unless Islam is modified to allow for variations: When Islam gives the women the right to "choose" to wear the turban/scarf/burka or not to wear it, then the secular Republic of Turkey will have no problem I'm sure with the turban...

I understand the concern of the religious citizens of Turkey, and I emphatize with them. They should be able to perform their religious and spiritual practices/duties freely - as long as it doesn't interfere with the freedom of others... Why am I not allowed to a beach because "namahrem" (other men's wifes, sisters, female members of their families) is there? How can you make sure that my mother/sister/wife/girlfriend will not be required to wear the scarf? How can anyone make sure of that? When my mother enters a mosque, she is required to wear a scarf, how democratic is that? You need to realize something: It's just as bad to require to wear the turban as to ban it. And the secular system does not state that you cannot wear the turban, it limits its use, so in comparison, secularism is more democratic than Islam!

It is a shame to cry for democracy in order to allow for the practice of a religion that is, in itself a dictatorship... This paradox is appaling, hence the statement of the PM Erdogan: "...democracy is a bus, we can get off anytime we want."

In conclusion, I do not believe that the cries fro democracy are sincere, and there are some malicious minds who use democracy as a tool, as a means to an end, and we all know what lies at that end...

Sincerely,

H. Ulas Ograk

My friend Ulas,

I definiely agree with you. When do you think that they will get us off from that bus? I think the time comes little by little.

Poor girl. But an equally objective cartoon would see a poor innocent smiling girl coming in peace with a sword-wielding Taliban army coming behind her. It is funny that Turks long for democracy and liberty, but here in the West (with fast growing Muslim populations) we now see democracy's flaw: it is a vehicle for takeover by Islam. Hence we look longingly to Ataturk who knew that Islam must be contained.

At heart, the issue is not the headscarf. The issues are Islam's inherent retrograde nature, demographics and democracy - all amounting to secular populations faced with becoming a minority within Islamic regimes. It is way too simplistic to talk of a poor innocent girl (though she is indeed that).

Demographics? Mark Steyn:

"Ataturk’s modern secular Turkey has simply been outbred by fiercely Islamic Turkey. That’s a lesson in demography from an all-Muslim sample: no pasty white blokes were involved. So the fact that Muslim fertility is declining in Tunisia is no consolation: all that will do, as in Turkey, is remove moderate Muslims from the equation too early in the game."

We in the West face a similar challenge: secularists have few babies compared to fundamental Muslims.

Islam? Let's take Erdogan's view:

"These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that's it."

Compare that with scholars in the West who are trying to bring moderate Muslims to account for the violent nature of Islam. Robert Spencer:

"... peaceful Muslims have never formulated an Islamic response to the jihadists' claim to represent pure and true Islam -- and as long as they do not and apparently cannot do so, the jihadists will continue to hold the intellectual initiative within Islamic communities worldwide. "Moderate" Muslim spokesmen such as those above have not just not answered me; they've done nothing to seize that intellectual initiative and blunt the force of jihadist recruitment among Muslims ...

... no one, Muslim or non-Muslim, has ever yet refuted the contention that Islam teaches warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers. And so one thing is certain: that warfare will continue."

And ...

"The Qur'an, on the other hand, quite clearly does teach believers to commit acts of violence against unbelievers -- see 2:190-193, 9:5, 9:29, 47:4, etc. There are no equivalents to such open-ended and universal commands, addressed to all believers to fight unbelievers, in the Bible.

... all of the schools that are considered orthodox teach, as part of the obligation of the Muslim community, warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers ..."

Secular Turks and Westerners, with demographics marching against them, seek one thing from Islam: the notion of "distance". It was Erdogan who said (I think of PKK): "Those who are unable to distance themselves from terrorism cannot avoid being adversely affected by the struggle against terrorism."

Ironically, he and fellow pious Muslims fail to apply this notion of distance to their own religion (intentially or innocently, I don't know). Secularists want to keep Islam at a comfortable distance, because they believe Islam is inherently trouble - it needs to be kept at arms length. Islam contains no restraining mechanism against its retrograde forces: an Islamic community only remains peaceful in spite of the retrograde beckonings of the Koran. Ergo, it is at long odds to remain peaceful.

So to talk of an innocent girl is to focus on a symptom of a wider problem. So long as moderate Muslims are unable to reform their religion, to distance it from the violent/supremist/fundamental - then secularist rightly see the headscarf as the flag of the enemy.

Demographics took Kosovo from the Serbs. Until Islam reforms itself, these impassible and irreconcilable differences with secularists will continue. And the result will be just like Kosovo: conflict, independence movements, separatists, etc. Nothing but trouble. But it will be securalists seeking independence from Islam, not the other way around. There is trouble ahead.

Until Islam reforms itself, no liberties such as the headscarf should be granted to it. For it seeks to subjugate the entire world under its thumb.

Lana,

What you are trying to say from your last 2 sentences is: Big Bad Muslims are going to take over so we must persecute Muslims.

That is pure Islamophobia, no matter how much you try make out that you concluded so from a thought process. You are backward minded and are clearly suffering from misinformation. I won't accuse you of ineducation, eventhough your opinion is that of a secularist bigot.

Islam is not in power but yes Muslims are. That's what bothers you and fortunately you are not able to change it.

Please know that I take great pleasure at the fact that this bothers you and other anti-democrats/secularists. The disempowerment of your social group that stimulates your opposition to Muslims (and other democrats) and their issues makes me happy. You guys have been put back in your place and i cannot help but smile.

So keep writing your islamophobia. It makes little difference now that you are back in your place. Such a poor mind can only weaken the secularist argument.

Pardon me for thinking this was a place for debate. In regards to putting people in their place, since Ceyhan seems quite unconcerned with the regressive nature of Islam, then I trust you will be happy with your place within Islam:

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//080209/ids_photos_wl/r2634022190.jpg/

Lana, you are right that I am quite unconcerned by the 'regressive nature of islam'. Islam, when correctly studied and practiced, as no such nature. This is a false perception taking place in your vivid imagination, caused by a false association of Wahabi and salafist interpretations of Islam to the mainstream one,(exemplified by your link). I am far more concerned by the regressive nature of kemalism and of your argument.

Shamelessly you post islamophobic propaganda and show complete disregard for freedom and established democratic standards. Still grappling with those contemporay ideas and practices I see. As far as I can see, and most agree, kemalist dogmatism and thirst for power is the threat to democracy. We need to keep this brand of turkish pseudo-secularism crypto-fascism which you defend in check. The new balance of powers in Turkey does to an extent prevent the pseudo-secularists from acting out their dangerous ideas but still a few left in the Judiciary and courts causing mischief. They will be put back in place too sooner or later.

My smile gets bigger....

Islam, when correctly studied and practiced, as no such nature. This is a false perception taking place in your vivid imagination, caused by a false association of Wahabi and salafist interpretations of Islam to the mainstream one.

Prove it. Spencer contends "all of the schools that are considered orthodox teach ... warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers". So name the school of Islam that refutes this. Show me where they refute all the violent, supremist passages of the Koran. I bet you can't. I bet you are either being deceptive or deceived.

Let it be clear, No Muslim refutes any passage of the Koran, our only divine source. Your question is therefore a non-starter and highlights the major flaw of your approach. Every part of the Koran needs to be read carefully and put in context. The Final Message is the Koran as an entirety. When one reads the Koran, one should do so in this context and also keep in mind the time of its proclamation to better understand its teachings. This is the ‘mainstream’ way, encouraged by the religious Directorate in Turkey, a Sunni institution (orthodox), which promotes a peaceful Islam adhered to by most Turks.

The problem arises when Muslim Extremists and Secularist extremists become selective about what parts of the Koran they will quote. Both like to point at verses referring to war. They even elevate and highlight these verses (as you attempted ) in order to consolidate their weak arguments. Both like to ignore the rest of the Holy Book because it puts the selected verses in context and renders them unusable for political militancy, Islamist or Secularist. You are much closer to the Taliban than most Turks. Like the Taliban, you express a desire to suppress, show disregard for democracy and simply do not understand ‘freedom’. You have opposite ideologies but the same extremist reasoning (or lack of it.)

The way you cite the Sura numbers etc is very similar to AlQaida and hateful extremists. It’s very disturbing. It is indeed the fact that you are ignorant of Islamic teaching and theology that makes you perceive any verse as you do. When a regular Muslim reads the Koran, he/she tries to attain some form of spiritual inner peace and understanding of his responsibility to God, certainly not to ready him/herself for the ‘warfare and subjugation of the unbeliever’. What planet are you on?

Lana, you are the one being deceived. In fact, Mustafa wrote a column highlighting the reasons why people like you have the false perception you do. You have simply bought, as Mustafa cleverly calls, ‘The Greatest Turkish Story Ever Sold’. If you have not read it, I advise you to.

Still smiling...