Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: The Greek destruction of Izmir and the Greek barbarism in Anatolia

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Last Online
    02-19-2017 @ 07:09 PM
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ethnicity
    German
    Country
    Germany
    Gender
    Posts
    2
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 9
    Given: 0

    9 Not allowed!

    Default The Greek destruction of Izmir and the Greek barbarism in Anatolia

    On 13 September, four days after the Turkish Nationalist army entered the City of Izmir, a fire broke out in the afternoon in a house situated near the railway station, in the quarter known as Basmahane. It soon spread and burnt most of the city. At the time, accusations were made against the Greeks, the Turks and the Armenians. However, fingers were pointing mostly at Greeks.

    They were, after all, burning and looting on their retreat to Izmir following their defeat, and both the Greek High Commissioner in Izmir, Aristide Sterghiades, and the Greek General, A. Papoulas, had warned that the Greek army might burn the city. The accusations levelled against the Turks were based on the reports and eyewitness accounts of a number of Greeks and Armenians but they were dismissed as being biased. The Armenians, too, were accused of collaborating with the Greeks in their sordid deeds in order to cover up their bomb throwing, sniping and arson.

    The U.S. Vice-Consul Maynard B. Barnes, no friend of the Turks, admitted that it did not seem logical for the Turks to destroy Izmir. On the morning of 15 September the Vice-Consul called with Captain Hepburn on the Vali (Governor) Abdul Halik Bey, and upon Kazim Pasha, the Military Governor of the city. Captain Hepburn stated in his diary : "The Turks had been so proud to have preserved Izmir intact throughout all the devastation caused by the Greeks, but the Armenians and Greeks have defeated us in the end". (1)

    On 20 September, the Turkish Legation in Stockholm issued a communique, stating that they have received telegraphic assurances that the fire in Izmir was started by the Greeks and the Armenians, who had set fire even to their own buildings, in order that the Turks might not be able to make use of them. The Legation pointed out that, "there was absolutely no reason for the Turks to destroy their most beautiful city next to Istanbul, now that they had definitely retaken it". (2)

    The Turkish statements were supported by Sir A. A. Baig, who observed in The Asiatic Review of October 1922 that attempts were being made to saddle the Turks with the crime of firing Izmir: "Though every Ottoman interest was involved in preserving the famous town, and to excuse the Armenians and the Greeks who had every motif of revenge to destroy what they were abondoning". (3)

    One can easily theorise that there was, in fact, not one fire, but many fires, set in revenge by Christians who did not wish the Turks to have the city, and by undisciplined soldiers and civilians, who simply wished to see the buildings burn. The often-stated idea of the Turkish Nationalist Government deliberately burning down their second greatest city immediately after it had once again become theirs is a prima facie absurdity. (4-5)

    The Greek landing on 15 May 1919 was planned and was a full part of the Greek nationalist project, the "Megali Idea", namely the expansion of Greece into Western Thrace, Istanbul and a part of Anatolia. Well before the landing, the Greek nation-state eliminated Muslims and Jews physically in 1821 and during the Balkan wars. (6)

    Correspondingly, the pretext used to land (the alleged persecution of Christians in Western Anatolia) was proved baseless by the Entente's (allied forces) investigative commission. (7) Even more clearly, in Yalova peninsula, in 1921, the Greek forces carried out a policy of systematic extermination of the Turkish elements. (8)

    As early as the Greek defeat in İnönü (March 1921), the Greek army started to destroy everything to leave only an absolutely devastated country to the Turks (the scorched earth policy). Berthe Georges-Gaulis, a French journalist who traveled and worked extensively in Turkey during the 1920s: "saw the organized ramp, touched the ruins, accounted the victims, interviewed the survivors", and so could testify about the "total annihilation of the zone evacuated by the Greek army". (9)

    Elzear Guiffray, the elected chief of the French community of Izmir, estimated the number of Turks killed by Greeks and Armenians, in Western Anatolia since May 1919 was in excess of 150,000 and without counting the deported persons, estimated to be 300,000. (10)

    General Maurice Pelle, the French High Commissioner in Istanbul, wrote on September 8, just before the entrance of the Kemalist troops in Izmir: "No news about a Kemalist massacre came to here from Smyrna, or any other place of Anatolia, neither from the English and French intelligence services, nor from the ecumenical patriarchate, always waiting for such facts. Contrariwise, the reality of the systematic devastations perpetrated by the Greek troops is established by European witnesses". (11)

    The correspondent of the Havas Agency declares that he is in a position to announce that the French High Commissioner in Constantinople and the French Consul-General at Smyrna, as well as Admiral Dumesnil, are convinced that the Smyrna fire can in no way be attributed to the Turks. This conviction is mainly based on the statements of salvage workers and trustworthy French witnesses who took part in the fight against the fire. The French naval authorities immediately took steps to control the statements of certain witnesses who declared that they had seen Turkish soldiers sprinkling the streets and houses with petrol. As a result of this investigation these statements have now been proved to be without foundation. The correspondent goes on to declare that the fire originated in the Armenian quarter. (12)

    * References:

    (1) Hepburn Diary / 15 September 1922 / quoted by Marjorie Housepian - The Smyrna Affair / New York / 1966.
    (2) British Foreign Office Document FO 371 - 7894 - E9946 / Patrick Ramsay to Curzon / 20 September 1922.
    (3) Baig, Sir A.A. / The Greek Defeat and British Policy / The Asiatic Review / October 1922.
    (4) Heath W. Lowry / Turkish History : On whose Sources Will it be Based ? / A Case Study on the Burning of Izmir / 1998.
    (5) McCarthy, Justin / Death and Exile - The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims / 1821 - 1922 / Princeton / New Jersey / 1996.
    (6) Alfred Lemaitre / Musulmans et Chretiens / Notes Sur la Guerre de l' Independance Grecque / Paris : G. Martin / 1895 ... Salahi Sonyel / " How the Turks of the Peloponnese Were Exterminated During the Greek Rebellion " / Belleten / April 1998 / L X H - 233 / pp. 121 - 135.
    (7) Atrocites Grecques en Turquie / Second Livre / Istanbul / Ahmed Ihsan & C i e / 1921 / p. 289.
    (8) Maurice Gehri / Mission d'enquete en Anatolie [ 12 - 22 Mai 1921 ] / Geneve / 1921 ... Atrocites Grecques en Turquie / Second Livre / Istanbul / Ahmed Ihsan & C i e / 1921 / p. 289.
    (9) Berthe Georges-Gaulis / Angora - Constantinople - Londres - Paris / Armand Colin / 1922 / p. 37.
    (10) Archives du Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres [ A M A E ] / La Courneuve / Microfilm p 1380 ... Arnold J. Toynbee / The Times of London / 6 April 1922 ... E. Alexander Powell / The Struggle for Power in Moslem Asia / London : John Long / 1925 / p. 182.
    (11) Telegramme du General Pelle au Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres / 8 Septembre 1922 / Archives du Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres [ A M A E ].
    (12) Origins of the Smyrna Fire / The London Times / 25 September 1922.


    (13) Relevant quotation:

    * The Turks failed to get the fire under, in spite of the employment of large numbers of troops, but they are not reported to have shown any sympathy with incendiaries or looters, whether Turk or non-Turk, who were shot at sight. (The London Times / Sep. 16 - 1922 / p. 8)

    * Our army took all the necessary measures to protect Izmir from accidents, before entering the city. However, the Greeks and the Armenians, with their pre-arranged plans have decided to destroy Izmir. Speeches made by (Archbishop) Hrisostomos at the churches have been heard by the Moslems, the burning of Izmir was defined as a religious duty. The destruction was accomplished by this organization. To confirm this, there are many documents and eyewitness accounts. Our soldiers worked with everything that they have to put out the fires. Those who attribute this to our soldiers may come to Izmir personally and see the situation. However, for a job like this, an official investigation is out of the question. The newspaper correspondents of various nationalities presently in Izmir are already executing this duty. The Christian population is treated with good care and the refugees are being returned to their places.
    (Telegram of Commander in Chief Ghazi Mustafa Kemal Pasha to Minister of Foreign Affairs Yusuf Kemal Bey / Bilal Şimşir, The Correspondence With Atatürk / 1981)

    * The French High Commissioner in Constantinople, the French Consul-General at Smyrna, as well as Admiral Dumesnil, are convinced that the Smyrna fire can in no way be attributed to the Turks. According to Reuters, the French naval authorities immediately took steps to control the statements of certain witnesses who declared that they had seen Turkish soldiers sprinkling the streets and houses with petrol. As a result of this investigation these statements have now been proved to be without foundation. (The London Times / Sep. 25, 1922)

    * The French Foreign Office reported that the Turks did not set fire to the buildings and that "there was no evidence that the Turks were in any way responsible for the damage" at Smyrna. (New York Times Editorial / Responsibility at Smyrna / Sep. 30, 1922)

    * Mr. L. R. Whittall, barrister-at-law, who has been in Smyrna for some years said there was no evidence as to who set fire to the town, but the consensus of opinion was that it was Greek and Armenian incendiaries. (The London Times / Oct. 6, 1922)

    * British Consul General at Smyrna, H. Lamb, who reported to his government that he had reason to believe that Greeks in concert with Armenians had burned Smyrna. (Smyrna During the Greek Occupation / Colonel Rachid Galib / Current History / Vol. 18 / May 1923 / p. 319)

    (14) Finally, a very important document. After making his own investigation and seeing how unreliable the atrocity stories were, as M.O. Prentiss related in his article and revealed through the testimony of Gresgovich, he slowly came around because he had the integrity to report the actual facts.



    * I think I must have investigated a hundred such stories (Turk atrocities), without finding one of them true.
    (Mark O. Prentiss, Representative of the Near East Relief / American Eyewitness Speaks / Actualities at Smyrna / by John Bakeless / The Atlantic Monthly / January 1924 / pp. 130 - 140)

    * Conclusion: Real history clearly proves who the real criminals and barbarians are.

  2. #2
    Veteran Member Ryujin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Last Online
    05-27-2023 @ 02:19 AM
    Ethnicity
    -
    Country
    Ireland
    Gender
    Posts
    6,464
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 6,802
    Given: 5,812

    3 Not allowed!

    Default


  3. #3
    Banned Albobalboa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Last Online
    01-27-2020 @ 09:11 PM
    Location
    Albanian Exile aka Diaspora Rat
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Illyro-Thracian
    Ethnicity
    Albanian
    Ancestry
    Rahovec
    Country
    Albania
    Y-DNA
    E-V13
    Taxonomy
    Albanian
    Politics
    Anti-East
    Hero
    Agim Ramadani, Cerciz Topulli
    Religion
    Agnostic
    Age
    25
    Gender
    Posts
    3,880
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,703
    Given: 2,615

    2 Not allowed!

    Default

    Both the Greeks and the Armenians ended up getting dicked down severely so that crime ended up being avenged. No reason to hold grudges over it this long after.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Last Online
    07-18-2019 @ 05:35 AM
    Ethnicity
    Albanian
    Country
    Albania
    Gender
    Posts
    9,641
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 2,848
    Given: 2,744

    3 Not allowed!

    Default

    Such a sad events. But later Ataturk kicked the ass of this malakas and they started to cry like bitches, Catastrophiiiiiiii.

  5. #5
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Online
    10-09-2023 @ 07:07 AM
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Hellenic
    Ethnicity
    Hellenic
    Country
    Greece
    Gender
    Posts
    15,503
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 10,179
    Given: 12,243

    2 Not allowed!

    Default

    No suprise that Turks did it .
    They did the same after years, in '55.

    Subhuman tactics, Erdogan follows them, too.
    Quote Originally Posted by peaceandfriendship View Post
    BTW - you having a picture of Pyrrhus as your avatar is the Albanian equivalent of Michael Jackson bleaching his skin white.

  6. #6
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Online
    12-21-2021 @ 02:01 AM
    Ethnicity
    Caucasian
    Country
    Trinidad-and-Tobago
    Y-DNA
    G
    mtDNA
    U5
    Gender
    Posts
    5,966
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,788
    Given: 1,803

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Queen B View Post
    No suprise that Turks did it .
    They did the same after years, in '55.

    Subhuman tactics, Erdogan follows them, too.
    Either Greek government is lying as hell or Turkish government has altered history in a way I can't even imagine. There is no middle ground.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Last Online
    06-13-2019 @ 08:52 PM
    Location
    Netherlands
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Turkic
    Ethnicity
    Turkish, Circassian
    Ancestry
    Anatolia, Caucasus
    Country
    Turkey
    Politics
    Democrat
    Hero
    Kemal Atatürk
    Religion
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Posts
    256
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 107
    Given: 163

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    up

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Türk
    Ancestry
    Aegean, Inner Anatolia, Transcaucasia
    Country
    Turkey
    Relationship Status
    Engaged
    Age
    21
    Gender
    Posts
    7,517
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 8,160
    Given: 3,931

    2 Not allowed!

    Default



  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    04-26-2021 @ 02:52 AM
    Location
    Various Cruise ships, Also Agio Pnevma, Serres, Macedonia, Greece.
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Hellenic
    Ethnicity
    Hellenic
    Ancestry
    Greek with a whiff of Bulgarian
    Country
    Greece
    Taxonomy
    A typical Balkan bastard
    Politics
    Strictly Rational.
    Hero
    Θαλής ο Μιλήσιος
    Religion
    Freedom with responsibitities.
    Age
    42
    Gender
    Posts
    16,654
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 5,566
    Given: 4,506

    1 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkSecret View Post
    Either Greek government is lying as hell or Turkish government has altered history in a way I can't even imagine. There is no middle ground.
    Canines are not famed for their imagination. Let's compare the track record of Greece and Turkey in terms of censorship, just to get an idea:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Greece

    Censorship in Greece

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name. Please search for Censorship in Greece in Wikipedia to check for alternative titles or spellings.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Turkey

    Censorship in Turkey

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Censorship in Turkey is regulated by domestic and international legislation, the latter (in theory) taking precedence over domestic law, according to Article 90 of the Constitution of Turkey (so amended in 2004).[1]
    Despite legal provisions, media freedom in Turkey has steadily deteriorated from 2010 onwards, with a precipitous decline following the attempted coup in July 2016.[2][3] President Tayyip Erdoğan has arrested hundreds of journalists, closed or taken over dozens of media outlets, and prevented journalists and their families from traveling. By some accounts, Turkey currently accounts for one-third of all journalists imprisoned around the world.[4]
    Since 2013, Freedom House ranks Turkey as "Not Free".[2] Reporters Without Borders ranked Turkey at the 149th place out of over 180 countries, between Mexico and DR Congo, with a score of 44.16.[5] In the third quarter of 2015, the independent Turkish press agency Bianet recorded a strengthening of attacks on the opposition media during the Justice and Development Party (AKP) interim government.[6] Bianet's final 2015 monitoring report confirmed this trend and underlined that once regained majority after the AKP interim government period, the Turkish government further intensified its pressure on the country's media.[7]
    According to Freedom House,
    The government enacted new laws that expanded both the state’s power to block websites and the surveillance capability of the National Intelligence Organization (MİT). Journalists faced unprecedented legal obstacles as the courts restricted reporting on corruption and national security issues. The authorities also continued to aggressively use the penal code, criminal defamation laws, and the antiterrorism law to crack down on journalists and media outlets. Verbal attacks on journalists by senior politicians—including Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the incumbent prime minister who was elected president in August—were often followed by harassment and even death threats against the targeted journalists on social media. Meanwhile, the government continued to use the financial and other leverage it holds over media owners to influence coverage of politically sensitive issues. Several dozen journalists, including prominent columnists, lost their jobs as a result of such pressure during the year, and those who remained had to operate in a climate of increasing self-censorship and media polarization.[2]
    In 2012 and 2013 the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) ranked Turkey as the worst journalist jailer in the world (ahead of Iran and China), with 49 journalists sitting in jail in 2012 and 40 in 2013.[8][9] Twitter's 2014 Transparency Report showed that Turkey filed over five times more content removal requests to Twitter than any other country in the second half of 2014, with requests rising another 150% in 2015.[10][11]
    During its 12-year rule, the ruling AKP has gradually expanded its control over media.[12] Today, numerous newspapers, TV channels and internet portals dubbed as Yandaş Medya ("Partisan Media") or Havuz Medyası ("Pool Media") continue their heavy pro-government propaganda.[13] Several media groups receive preferential treatment in exchange for AKP-friendly editorial policies.[14] Some of these media organizations were acquired by AKP-friendly businesses through questionable funds and processes.[15] Media not friendly to AKP, on the other hand, are threatened with intimidation, inspections and fines.[16] These media group owners face similar threats to their other businesses.[17] An increasing number of columnists have been fired for criticizing the AKP leadership.[18][19][20][21

    History[edit]
    Further information: Multi-party period of Turkey
    Regional censorship predates the establishment of the Republic of Turkey. On 15 February 1857, the Ottoman Empire issued law governing printing houses ("Basmahane Nizamnamesi"); books first had to be shown to the governor, who forwarded them to commission for education ("Maarif Meclisi") and the police. If no objection was made, the Sultanate would then inspect them. Without censure from the Sultan books could not be legally issued.[22] On 24 July 1908, at the beginning of the Second Constitutional Era, censorship was lifted; however, newspapers publishing stories that were deemed a danger to interior or exterior State security were closed.[22] Between 1909 and 1913 four journalists were killed—Hasan Fehmi, Ahmet Samim, Zeki Bey, and Hasan Tahsin (Silahçı).[23]
    Following the Turkish War of Independence, the Sheikh Said rebellion was used as pretext for implementing martial law ("Takrir-i Sükun Yasası") on March 4, 1925; newspapers, including Tevhid-i Efkar, Sebül Reşat, Aydınlık, Resimli Ay, and Vatan, were closed and several journalists arrested and tried at the Independence Courts.[22]
    During World War II (1939–1945) many newspapers were ordered shut, including the dailies Cumhuriyet (5 times, for 5 months and 9 days), Tan (7 times, for 2 months and 13 days), and Vatan (9 times, for 7 months and 24 days).[22]
    When the Democratic Party under Adnan Menderes came to power in 1950, censorship entered a new phase. The Press Law changed, sentences and fines were increased. Several newspapers were ordered shut, including the dailies Ulus (unlimited ban), Hürriyet, Tercüman, and Hergün (two weeks each). In April 1960, a so-called investigation commission ("Tahkikat Komisyonu") was established by the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. It was given the power to confiscate publications, close papers and printing houses. Anyone not following the decisions of the commission were subject to imprisonment, between one and three years.[22]
    Freedom of speech was heavily restricted after the 1980 military coup headed by General Kenan Evren. During the 1980s and 1990s, broaching the topics of secularism, minority rights (in particular the Kurdish issue), and the role of the military in politics risked reprisal.[24][24]
    Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law (Law 3713), slightly amended in 1995 and later repealed,[25] imposed three-year prison sentences for "separatist propaganda." Despite its name, the Anti-Terror Law punished many non-violent offences.[24] Pacifists have been imprisoned under Article 8. For example, publisher Fatih Tas was prosecuted in 2002 under Article 8 at Istanbul State Security Court for translating and publishing writings by Noam Chomsky, summarizing the history of human rights violations in southeast Turkey; he was acquitted, however, in February 2002.[24] Prominent female publisher Ayse Nur Zarakolu, who was described by The New York Times as "[o]ne of the most relentless challengers to Turkey's press laws", was imprisoned under Article 8 four times.[26][27]
    Since 2011, the AKP government has increased restrictions on freedom of speech, freedom of the press and internet use,[28] and television content,[29] as well as the right to free assembly.[30] It has also developed links with media groups, and used administrative and legal measures (including, in one case, a $2.5 billion tax fine) against critical media groups and critical journalists: "over the last decade the AKP has built an informal, powerful, coalition of party-affiliated businessmen and media outlets whose livelihoods depend on the political order that Erdogan is constructing. Those who resist do so at their own risk."[31] Since his time as prime minister through to his presidency Erdogan has sought to control the press, forbidding coverage, restricting internet use and stepping up repression on journalists and media outlets.[32]
    Main article: Media censorship and disinformation during the Gezi Park protests
    Foreign media noted that, particularly in the early days (31 May – 2 June 2013) of the Gezi Park protests, the events attracted relatively little mainstream media coverage in Turkey, due to either government pressure on media groups' business interests or simply ideological sympathy by media outlets.[33][34] The BBC noted that while some outlets are aligned with the AKP or are personally close to Erdoğan, "most mainstream media outlets – such as TV news channels HaberTurk and NTV, and the major centrist daily Milliyet – are loath to irritate the government because their owners' business interests at times rely on government support. All of these have tended to steer clear of covering the demonstrations."[34] Ulusal Kanal and Halk TV provided extensive live coverage from Gezi park.[35]
    Turkey's Journalists Union estimated that at least "72 journalists had been fired or forced to take leave or had resigned in the past six weeks since the start of the unrest" in late May 2013 due to pressure from the AKP government. Kemal Kilicdaroglu, head of the Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (CHP) party, said 64 journalists have been imprisoned and “We are now facing a new period where the media is controlled by the government and the police and where most media bosses take orders from political authorities.” The government says most of the imprisoned journalists have been detained for serious crimes, like membership in an armed terrorist group, that are not related to journalism.[36][37]
    Bianet's periodical reports on freedom of the press in Turkey published in October 2015 recorded a strengthening of attacks on the opposition media during the AKP interim government in the third quarter of 2015. Bianet recorded the censorship of 101 websites, 40 Twitter accounts, 178 news; attacks against 21 journalists, three media organs, and one printing house; civil pursuits against 28 journalists; and the six-fold increase of arrests of media representatives, with 24 journalists and 9 distributors imprisoned.[38] The increased criminalisation of the media follows the freezing of the Kurdish peace process and the failure of AKP to obtain an outright majority at the June 2015 election and to achieve the presidentialisation of the political system. Several journalists and editors are tried for being allegedly members of unlawful organisations, linked to either Kurds or the Gülen movement, others for alleged insults to religion and to the President. In 2015 Cumhuriyet daily and Doğan Holding were investigated for "terror", "espionage" and "insult". On the date of Bianet's publication, 61 people, of whom 37 journalists, were convict, defendant or suspect for having insulted or personally attacked the then-PM, now-President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The European Court of Human Rights condemned Turkey for violation of the freedom of expression in the Abdurrahman Dilipak case (Sledgehammerinvestigation),[39][40] and the Turkish Constitutional Court upheld the violation of the freedom of expression of five persons, including a journalist. RTÜK could not yet choose its President; it still warned companies five times and fined them six times. The Supreme Electoral Council ordered 65 channels twice to stop broadcasting the results of the June 2015 election before the end of the publishing ban.
    Attack to media freedom went far beyond the AKP interim government period. The January 2016 updated Bianet's report confirmed this alarming trend, underlining that the whole 2014 figure of arrested journalists increased in 2015, reaching the number of 31 journalists arrested (22 in 2014) [7] Once regained the majority on November 1, 2015 elections, the Turkish government intensified the pressure on the country's media, for example by banning some TV channels, in particular those linked to the Fethullah Gülen movement, from digital platforms and by seizing control of their broadcasting. In November 2015, Can Dündar, Cumhuriyet's editor in chief and its Ankara representative Erdem Gül were arrested on charges of belonging to a terror organisation, espionage and for having allegedly disclosed confidential information. Investigation against the two journalists were launched after the newspaper documented the transfer of weapons from Turkey to Syria in trucks of the National Intelligence Organization previously involved in the MİT trucks scandal. Dündar and Gül were released in February 2016 when the Supreme Court decided that their detention was undue.[41] In July 2016, in the occasion of the launch of the campaign "I'm a journalist", Mehmet Koksal, project officer of the European Federation of Journalistsdeclared that "Turkey has the largest number of journalists in jail out of all the countries in the Council of Europe.[42]
    The situation further deteriorated as consequence of the 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt of 15 July 2016 and the subsequent government reaction, leading to an increase of attacks targeting the media in Turkey. Mustafa Cambaz, a photojournalist working for the daily Yeni Safak was killed during the coup. Turkish soldiers attempting to overthrow the government took control of several newsrooms, including the Ankara-based headquarter of the state broadcaster TRT. They also forced a TV channel's anchor to read a statement at gunpoint while the member of the editorial board were held hostage and threatened. Also, soldiers seized the offices in Istanbul of Doğan Media Center which hosted several media outles, including Hurriyet daily newspaper and the private TV station CNN Türk, holding journalists and other professionals hostage for many hours during the night. During the coup's night, in the streets of Istanbul, a photojournalist working for Hurriyet and the Associated Press was assaulted by civilians that were demonstrating against the coup.[43] In the following days, after the government regained power, the state regulatory authority named Information Technologies and Communications Authority shut down 20 independent online news portals. On July 19, the Turkish Radio and Television Supreme Council decided to revoke the licence of 24 TV channels and radio stations for being allegedly connected to the Gülen community, without providing much details on this decision. Also, following the decision of declaring the state of emergency for three months taken on 21 July,[44] a series of limitation to freedom of expression and freedom of the media have been imposed. The measures within the regime of emergency include the possibility to ban printing, copying, publishing and distributing newspapers, magazines, books and leaflets.[45]
    An editorial criticizing press censorship published May 22, 2015[46] and inclusion of Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, as one of a rising class of "soft" dictators in an op-ed published in May 2015 in The New York Times[47] resulted in a strong reaction by Erdogan.[48] In an interview Dündar gave in July 2016, before the coup attempt and the government reaction, the journalist stated that "Turkey is going through its darkest period, journalism-wise. In has never been an easy country for journalists, but I think today it has reached its lowest point and is experiencing unprecedented repression".[49]
    Legislative framework[edit]

    The Constitution of Turkey, at art. 28, states that the press is free and shall not be censored. Expressions of non-violent opinion are safeguarded by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, ratified by Turkey in 1954, and various provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, signed by Turkey in 2000.[24] Many Turkish citizens convicted under the laws mentioned below have applied to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and won their cases.[24]
    Yet, Constitutional and international guarantees are undermined by restrictive provisions in the Criminal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, and anti-terrorism laws, effectively leaving prosecutors and judges with ample discretion to repress ordinary journalistic activities.[2]The 2017 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights' report on freedom of expression and media freedom in Turkey reiterated that censorship problems stem mainly from the Turkish Criminal Code and the Turkish Anti- Terrorism Law No. 3713.[50][51][52]Prosecutors continued to bring a number of cases for terrorism or membership of an armed organization mainly based on certain statements of the accused, as coinciding with the aims of such organization.[51]
    Beside the Article 301, amended in 2008, and Article 312, more than 300 provisions constrained freedom of expression, religion, and association, according to the Turkish Human Rights Association (2002).[24] Article No. 299 of the Turkish Criminal Code provides for criminal defamation of the Head of the State. which is being increasingly enforced. 18 persons were in prison for this offence as of June 2016.[51][52] Article No. 295 of the Criminal Code is increasingly being enforced as well, imposing a “press silence” (Yayın Yasağı) on topics of relevant public interest such as terrorist attacks and bloody blasts.[53] The silence can be imposed on TVs, print media, radios as well as to Internet content, hosting and service providers. Violating this norm can lead up to three years of detention.[54]
    Many of the repressive provisions found in the Press Law, the Political Parties Law, the Trade Union Law, the Law on Associations, and other legislation were imposed by the military junta after its coup in 1980. As to the Internet, the relevant Law is Law No. 5651 of 2007.[55]
    According to the Council of Europe Commissioner and to the Venice Commission for Democracy through Law, the decrees issued under the state of emergency since July 2016, conferred an almost limitless discretionay power to the Turkish executive to apply sweeping misure against NGOs, the media and the public sector.[51][56][57] Specifically, many NGOs were closed, the media organizations seized or shut down and public sector employees as well as journalists and media workers arrested or intimidated.[51]
    Article 301[edit]
    Main article: Article 301 (Turkish Penal Code)
    Article 301 is a provision in the Turkish penal code that, since 2005 made it a punishable offense to insult Turkishness or various official Turkish institutions. Charges were brought in more than 60 cases, some of which were high-profile.[58]
    The article was amended in 2008, including changing "Turkishness" into "the Turkish nation", reducing maximum prison terms to 2 years, and making it obligatory to get the approval of the Minister of Justice before filing a case.[59][60] Changes were deemed "largely cosmetic" by Freedom House,[2] although the number of prosecutions dropped. Although only few persons were convicted, trials under Art. 301 are seen by human rights watchdogs as a punitive measure in themselves, as time-consuming and expensive, thus exerting a chilling effect on free speech.[2]

    • Novelist Orhan Pamuk, at the time a Nobel Prize candidate, was prosecuted under Article 301 for discussing the Armenian Genocide; Pamuk subsequently won the prize. * Perihan Mağden, a columnist for the newspaper Radikal, was tried under the article for provocation, and acquitted on July 27, 2006; Mağden had broached the topic of conscientious objection to mandatory military service as an abuse of human rights.[61][62][63]
    • The case of the Academics for Peace is also relevant:[64] on January 14, 2016, 27 academics were detained for interrogations after having signed a petition with more than other 1.000 people asking for Peace in the South- East of the country, where there are ongoing violent clashes between the Turkish Army and the PKK.[65] The academics accused the government of breaching international law. An investigation started upon those academics under charges of “terrorism propaganda”, “incitement to hatred and enmity” and for “insulting the State” under Article No. 301 of the Turkish Criminal Code.[citation needed]

    Article 312[edit]
    Main article: Article 312 (Turkish Penal Code)
    Article 312 of the criminal code imposes three-year prison sentences for incitement to commit an offence and incitement to religious or racial hatred. In 1999 the mayor of Istanbul and current president Recep Tayyip Erdogan was sentenced to 10 months' imprisonment under Article 312 for reading a few lines from a poem that had been authorized by the Ministry of Education for use in schools, and consequently had to resign.[24] In 2000 the chairman of the Human Rights Association, Akin Birdal, was imprisoned under Article 312 for a speech in which he called for "peace and understanding" between Kurds and Turks,[24] and thereafter forced to resign, as the Law on Associations forbids persons who breach this and several other laws from serving as association officials.[24] On February 6, 2002, a "mini-democracy package" was voted by Parliament, altering wording of Art. 312. Under the revised text, incitement can only be punished if it presents "a possible threat to public order."[24] The package also reduced the prison sentences for Article 159 of the criminal code from a maximum of six years to three years. None of the other laws had been amended or repealed as of 2002.[24]
    Other[edit]
    Defamation and libel remain criminal charges in Turkey (Article 125 of the Penal Code). They often result in fines and jail terms. Bianet counted 10 journalists convicted of defamation, blasphemy or incitement to hatred in 2014.[2]
    Article 216 of the Penal Code, banning incitement of hatred and violence on grounds of ethnicity, class or religion (with penalties of up to 3 years), is also used against journalists and media workers.[2]
    Article 314 of the Penal Code is often invoked against journalists, particularly Kurds and leftists, due to its broad definition of terrorism and of membership in an armed organisation. It carries a minimum sentence of 7,5 years. According to the OSCE, most of 22 jailed journalsts as of June 2014 had been charged or condemned based on Art. 314.
    Article 81 of the Political Parties Law (imposed by the military junta in 1982) forbids parties from using any language other than Turkish in their written material or at any formal or public meetings. This law is strictly enforced.[24][better source needed] Kurdish deputy Leyla Zanawas jailed in 1994, ostensibly for membership to the PKK.
    In 1991, laws outlawing communist (Articles 141 and 142 of the criminal code) and Islamic fundamentalist ideas (Article 163 of the criminal code) were repealed.[24] This package of legal changes substantially freed up expression of leftist thought, but simultaneously created a new offence of "separatist propaganda" under Article 8 of the Anti-Terror Law.[24] Prosecutors also began to use Article 312 of the criminal code (on religious or racial hatred) in place of Article 163.[24]
    The 1991 antiterrorism law (the Law on the Fight against Terrorism) has been invoked to charge and imprison journalists for activities that Human Rights Watch define as “nonviolent political association” and speech. The European Court of Human Rights has in multiple occasions found the law to amount to censorship and breach of freedom of expression.[2]
    Constitutional amendments adopted in October 2001 removed mention of "language forbidden by law" from legal provisions concerning free expression. Thereafter, university students began a campaign for optional courses in Kurdish to be put on the university curriculum, triggering more than 1,000 detentions throughout Turkey during December and January 2002.[24] Actions have also been taken against the Laz minority.[24] According to the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, Turkey only recognizes the language rights of the Jewish, Greek and Armenian minorities.[24] The government ignores Article 39(4) of the Treaty of Lausanne, which states that: "[n]o restrictions shall be imposed on the free use by any Turkish national of any language in private intercourse, in commerce, religion, in the press or in publications of any kind or at public meetings."[24][better source needed] Pressured by the EU, Turkey has promised to review the Broadcasting Law.[24]
    Other legal changes in August 2002 allowed for the teaching of languages, including Kurdish.[66] However, limitations on Kurdish broadcasting continue to be strong: according to the EU Commission (2006), "time restrictions apply, with the exception of films and music programmes.[better source needed] All broadcasts, except songs, must be subtitled or translated in Turkish, which makes live broadcasts technically cumbersome. Educational programmes teaching the Kurdish language are not allowed. The Turkish Public Television (TRT) has continued broadcasting in five languages including Kurdish. However, the duration and scope of TRT's national broadcasts in five languages is very limited. No private broadcaster at national level has applied for broadcasting in languages other than Turkish since the enactment of the 2004 legislation."[67][better source needed] TRT broadcasts in Kurdish (as well as in Arab and Circassian dialect) are symbolic,[68][better source needed] compared to satellite broadcasts by channels such as controversial Roj TV, based in Denmark.
    In 2003 Turkey adopted a freedom of information law. Yet, state secrets that may harm national security, economic interests, state investigations, or intelligence activity, or that “violate the private life of the individual,” are exempt from requests. This has made accessing official information particularly difficult.[2]
    Amendments in 2013 (the Fourth Judicial Reform package), spurred by the EU accession process and a renewed Kurdish peace process, amended several laws. Antiterrorism regulations were tweaked so that publication of statements of illegal groups would only be a crime if the statement included coercion, violence, or genuine threats. Yet, the reform was deemed as not reaching international human rights standards, since it did not touch upon problematic norms such as the Articles 125, 301 and 314 of the Penal Code.[2] In 2014 a Fifth Judicial Reform package was passed, which among others reduced the maximum period pretrial detention from 10 to 5 years. Consequently, several journalists were released from jail, pending trial.[2]
    New laws in 2014 were nevertheless detrimental to freedom of speech.[2]

    • February 2014 amendments to the Law no. 5651 ("Internet Law") allowed the Telecommunication Authority (TİB) powers to block websites on vague grounds of privacy protection, with only ex-post court intervention within 48h to confirm the block. A September 2014 amendment to Law no. 5651 had also allowed TİB to block websites “for national security, the restoration of public order, and the prevention of crimes”; this was later overturned by the Constitutional Court in October.[2]
    • April 2014 amendments to secret service regulations (Law Amending the Law on State Intelligence Services and the National Intelligence Organization) granted more powers to the MİT, including the faculty to access any personal data without a court order, as well as personal legal immunity for breaches of the law. It also made it a crime, punished with up to 9 years in prison, to acquire or publish information on MİT activities.[2]
    • December 2014 amendments to the Penal and Criminal Procedure Codes made it possible to search persons or premises under simple “reasonable suspicion,” rather than “strong suspicion based on concrete evidence.” Police resorted to such grounds already in October, even before their actual approval, to raid the home of journalist Aytekin Gezici in Adana, after he had criticised the government on Twitter.[2]
    • August 2016, Turkey closed the Presidency of Telecommunication and Communication which had been tasked with regulation of censorship and surveillance orders since 2005. The transfer of executive powers to the Information and Communication Technologies Authority eliminated ministerial oversight of internet blocking orders as part of a wider set of reforms to introduce an executive presidency.[69]

    In June 2018, Esenyurt municipality in Istanbul has taken down Arabic shop signs, citing a new regulation stipulating that shop signs must include at least 75 percent Turkish words. Esenyurt had one of the highest populations of Syrian refugees in Istanbul after the start of the Syrian Civil war and many Syrian businesses started to pop up.[70]
    TO BE CONTINUED...

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    04-26-2021 @ 02:52 AM
    Location
    Various Cruise ships, Also Agio Pnevma, Serres, Macedonia, Greece.
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Hellenic
    Ethnicity
    Hellenic
    Ancestry
    Greek with a whiff of Bulgarian
    Country
    Greece
    Taxonomy
    A typical Balkan bastard
    Politics
    Strictly Rational.
    Hero
    Θαλής ο Μιλήσιος
    Religion
    Freedom with responsibitities.
    Age
    42
    Gender
    Posts
    16,654
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 5,566
    Given: 4,506

    1 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkSecret View Post
    Either Greek government is lying as hell or Turkish government has altered history in a way I can't even imagine. There is no middle ground.
    ...CONTINUED

    ECHR oversight[edit]
    See also: List of ECHR cases concerning Article 10 in Turkey
    Turkey is one of the Council of Europe member states with the greatest number of ECHR-recognised violations of rights included in the European Convention on Human Rights. Of these, several concern Article 10 of the Convention, on freedom of expression.

    • The Tanıyan v. Turkey case (no. 29910/96) concerned the confiscation orders were issued for 117 of the 126 issues of the Yeni Politika daily published in 1995, either under the Prevention of Terrorism Act or under Article 312 of the Criminal Code. The Turkish government struck a friendly settlement with Necati Tanıyan in 2005, paying EUR 7,710 in damages and recognising the "interference" and the need "to ensure that the amended Article 312 will be applied in accordance with the requirements of Article 10 of the Convention as interpreted in the Court's case-law".[71]
    • The Halis Doğan et al v. Turkey case (no. 50693/99) concerned 6 journalists (including Ragıp Zarakolu) who worked for the Turkish daily newspaper Özgür Bakış. The newspaper was banned from the provinces of south-east Anatolia (OHAL) in which a state of emergency had been declared on 7 May 1999. The ECHR struck the decision as unmotivated, arbitrary, and lacking a mechanism of judicial appeal.[72]
    • The Demirel and Ateş v. Turkey case (no. 10037/03 and 14813/03), concerned the editor and owner of the weekly newspaper Yedinci Gündem (Seventh Order of the Day), twice fined in 2002 for publishing statements and an interview with members of the PKK (Workers’ Party of Kurdistan). The paper was also temporarily closed down. The ECHR condemned Turkey in 2007, as the controversial contents did not incite violence or constitute hate speech.[73]
    • The Ürper and Others v. Turkey cases (2007) concerned 26 Turkish citizens, either owners or directors and journalists of four daily newspapers (Ülkede Özgür Gündem, Gündem, Güncel and Gerçek Demokrasi) which were repeatedly suspended for up to one month each between November 2006 and October 2007, as being considered PKK propaganda outlets. The applicants were also criminally prosecuted. The ECHR in 2009 condemned the suspension of future publications based on assumptions as an unjustifiable restriction to press freedom.[74]
    • Özgür Gündem case (2000): Özgür Gündem is a pro- Kurdish and leftist media outlet based in Istanbul. From the beginning of the ‘90’s, the newspaper has been subject to raids and legal actions, with many journalists being arrested and even killed. The paper remained closed from 1994 to 2011 due to a court order. These facts were the bases for the Özgür Gündem v. Turkey case before the ECtHR.[75] The applicants claimed that “the Turkish authorities had, directly or indirectly, sought to hinder, prevent and render impossible the production of Özgür Gündem by the encouragement of or acquiescence in unlawful killings and forced disappearances, by harassment and intimidation of journalists and distributors, and by failure to provide any or any adequate protection for journalists and distributors when their lives were clearly in danger and despite requests for such protection”. Concerning the police operation at the Özgür Gündem premises in Istanbul on December 10, 1993 and concerning the legal measures taken in respect of issues of the newspaper, the Strasbourg Court found that there was a breach of Article 10 ECHR.[75]
    • Fırat (Hrant) Dink v. Turkey (2010): Dink was a Turkish- Armenian journalist writing for the newspaper Agos. Between 2003 and 2004 he wrote a series of articles about the identity of Turkish citizens with Armenian origins. He was charged under Article 301 in 2006 and received a six-month suspended sentence of imprisonment. This verdict did not respect the principle, stated in the official comment to the 2008 of Article 301, that a single word or expression cannot justify the resort to criminal law.[76] In June 2007, he was murdered by a nationalist. The European Strasbourg Court (ECtHR) considered the verdict lacking of any “pressing social need” and - together with the authorities‟ failure to protect Dink against attacks of extreme nationalist groups - Turkey's “positive obligations” regarding Dink's freedom expression had not been complied with.[76][77]
    • Ahmet Yildirim v. Turkey (2013):[78] it concerns the Internet Law No. 5651 and the blocking of “Google Sites”, defamation, the usage of disproportionate measures and the need for restrictions to be prescribed by law.

    Attacks and threats against journalists[edit]

    Physical attacks and assassinations of journalists[edit]
    Main article: List of journalists killed in Turkey
    The physical safety of journalists in Turkey is at risk.
    Several journalists died in the 1990s at the height of the Kurdish–Turkish conflict. Soon after the pro-Kurdish press had started to publish the first daily newspaper by the name of "Özgür Gündem" (Free Agenda) killings of Kurdish journalists started. Hardly any of them has been clarified or resulted in sanctions for the assailants. "Murder by unknown assailants" (tr: faili meçhul) is the term used in Turkish to indicate that the perpetrators were not identified because of them being protected by the State and cases of disappearance. The list of names of distributors of Özgür Gündem and its successors that were killed (while the perpetrators mostly remained unknown) includes 18 names.[79] Among the 33 journalists that were killed between 1990 and 1995 most were working for the so-called Kurdish Free Press.
    The killings of journalists in Turkey since 1995 are more or less individual cases. Most prominent among the victims is Hrant Dink, killed in 2007, but the death of Metin Göktepe also raised great concern, since police officers beat him to death. The death of Metin Alataş in 2010 is also a source of disagreement: While the autopsy claimed it was suicide, his family and colleagues demanded an investigation. He had formerly received death threats and had been violently assaulted.[80] Since 2014, several Syrian journalists who were working from Turkey and reporting on the rise of Daesh have been assassinated.
    In 2014, journalists suffered obstruction, tear gas injuries, and physical assault by the police in several instances: while covering the February protests against internet censorship, the May Day demonstrations, as well as the Gezi Park protests anniversaries (when CNN correspondent Ivan Watson was shortly detained and roughed up). Turkish security forces fired tear gas at journalists reporting from the border close to the Syrian town of Kobane in October.[2]

    • The CPJ counted one media-related killing in 2014, the one of Kadir Bağdu who was shot in Adana while delivering the pro-Kurdish daily Azadiya Welat.[2]
    • The general secretary of the Turkish Journalists’ Union, Mustafa Kuleli, as well as journalist Hasan Cömert, were attacked in February 2014 by unknown assailants. The journalist Mithat Fabian Sözmen had to seek medical care after a physical attack in March 2014.[2]

    Arrests of journalists[edit]
    Main article: List of arrested journalists in Turkey
    Despite the 2004 Press Law foresees only fines, other restrictive laws have led to several journalists and writers being put behind bars. According to a report published by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), at least seven journalists remained in prison by the end of 2014. The independent Turkish press agency Bianet counted 22 journalists and 10 publishers in jail - most of them Kurds, charged with association with an illegal organisation.[2]
    In 2016, Turkey became the biggest jail for journalists. As to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) rank, Turkey was the first country ever to jail 81 journalists, editors and media practitioners in one year.[81]
    According to a CPJ report, Turkish authorities are engaging in widespread criminal prosecution and jailing of journalists, and are applying other forms of severe pressure to promote self-censorship in the press. The CPJ has found highly repressive laws, particularly in the penal code and anti-terror law; a criminal procedure code that greatly favors the state; and a harsh anti-press tone set at the highest levels of government. Turkey's press freedom situation has reached a crisis point.[82] This reports mentions 3 types of journalists targeted :

    • investigative and critical reporters : victims of the anti-state prosecutions : The government's broad inquiry into the Ergenekon plot ensnared investigative reporters. But the evidence, rather than revealing conspirators, points to a government intent on punishing critical reporters.
    • Kurdish journalists : Turkish authorities conflate support for the Kurdish cause with terrorism itself. When it comes to Kurdish journalists, newsgathering activities such as fielding tips, covering protests, and conducting interviews are evidence of a crime.
    • collateral damages of the general assault on the press : The authorities are waging one of the world's biggest anti-press campaigns in recent history. Dozens of writers and editors are in prison, nearly all on terrorism or other anti-state charges.[82]

    Kemalist and / or nationalist journalists were arrested on charges referring to the Ergenekon case and several left-wing and Kurdish journalists were arrested on charges of engaging in propaganda for the PKK listed as a terrorist organization. In short, writing an article or making a speech can still lead to a court case and a long prison sentence for membership or leadership of a terrorist organisation. Together with possible pressure on the press by state officials and possible firing of critical journalists, this situation can lead to a widespread self-censorship.[83]
    In November 2013, three journalists were sentenced to life in prison as senior members of the illegal Marxist–Leninist Communist Party - among them the founder of Özgür Radio, Füsun Erdoğan. They had been arrested in 2006 and held until 2014, when they were released following legal reforms on pre-trial detention terms. An appeal is still pending.[2]
    In February 2017, German-Turkish journalist Deniz Yücel was jailed in Istanbul.[84][85][86]
    On April 10, 2017, the Italian journalist Gabriele Del Grande was arrested in Hatay and jailed in Mugla.[87] He was in Turkey in order to write a book on the war in Syria. He went on hunger strike on April 18, 2017.[87]
    Judicial prosecution[edit]
    Main article: List of prosecuted Turkish writers
    Defamation and libel remain criminal charges in Turkey. They often result in fines and jail terms. Bianet counted 10 journalists convicted of defamation, blasphemy or incitement to hatred in 2014.[2]
    Courts' activities on media-related cases, particularly those concerning the corruption scandals surrounding Erdoğan and his close circle, have cast doubts on the independence and impartiality of the judiciary in Turkey. The Turkish Journalists' Association and the Turkish Journalists' Union counted 60 new journalists under prosecution for this single issue in 2013, for a total number of over 100 lawsuits.[2]

    • In January 2009 Adnan Demir, editor of the provocative newspaper Taraf, was charged with divulging secret military information, under Article 336 of the Turkish Criminal Code.[88] He was accused of having published an article in October 2008 that alleged police and military had been warned of an imminent PKK attack that same month, an attack which resulted in the death of 13 soldiers.[88] Demir faces up to 5 years of prison.[88] On 29 December 2009 İstanbul Heavy Penal Court No. 13 acquitted Adnan Demir.[89]
    • In February 2014, author İhsan Eliaçık was condemned for defamation, after being sued by the Presidency for comments on Twitter during the Gezi Park protests of 2013.[2]
    • In April 2014 the columnist Önder Aytaç was condemned to 10 months in jail for “insulting public officials” for a tweet about Erdoğan. Aytaç claimed the tweet included a typo.[2]
    • The Cumhuriyet columnist Can Dündar was sued for defamation by Erdoğan in May 2014 for an article he had written in April.[2] He received CPJ's International Press Freedom Award in 2016.[90]
    • In August 2014, the Taraf columnist Mehmet Baransu was briefly arrested for defamation after criticizing the authorities, and faced the risk of a long jail sentence in a separate case for allegedly publishing documents concerning a classified meeting in 2004.[2]
    • In September 2014 the writer, journalist, and publisher Erol Özkoray was condemned to 11 months and 20 days (with suspended sentence) for defamation against Erdoğan in a book he had authored about the Gezi Park protests.[2]

    Denial of accreditation and deportation of foreign journalists[edit]

    • In January 2014 the Azerbaijani journalist Mahir Zeynalov was deported after being sued by the President for posting links on Twitter to articles on a corruption scandal.[2]
    • In September 2015, Turkey deported three foreign journalists in Diyarbakır, who were reporting on Turkey's Kurdish issue. Two British Vice News journalists, reporter Jake Hanrahan and photojournalist Philip Pendlebury, were detained on 27 August and then deported on 2 September. Mohammed Ismael Rasool, a Turkish citizen who was with the British team as a fixer, was detained, questioned and faced further legal repercussions. They were reporting on the Turkish government's conflict with the Kurdistan Workers' Party(PKK).[91]
    • One week later, Dutch journalist Fréderike Geerdink, who was known for being the only foreign reporter based in Diyarbakır and focusing on Kurdish issues, was deported by Turkish authorities following her second arrest in 2015.[92] Geerdink, a freelance reporter whose contributions appeared regularly in Dikan, had written a book about the Turkish strike that resulted in the Roboski massacre of Kurds, which was published in 2014 but released in English in 2015.[93]
    • Rauf Mirkadirov, Azerbaijani correspondent from Ankara for Ayna and Zerkalo, was extradited to Azerbaijan without access to a lawyer. He was then charged with espionage by the Azerbaijani authorities. Mirkadirov had written accounts that were critical of both governments.[2]

    Hostile public rhetoric and smear campaigns[edit]
    Particularly since 2013, the President Erdoğan and other governmental officials have resorted to hostile public rhetoric against independent journalists and media outlets, which is then echoed in the pro-governmental press and TV, accusing foreign media and interest groups of conspiring to bring down his government.[2]

    • The Economist correspondent, Amberin Zaman, was publicly denounced as a "shameless militant" by Erdoğan at a pre-electoral rally in August 2014. Erdoğan tried to intimidate her by telling her to "know [her] place". She was then subjected to a deluge of abuse and threats on social media by AKP supporters in the following months.[2]
    • In September 2014 The New York Times reporter Ceylan Yeğinsu was publicly smeared and depicted as a traitor for a photograph caption in a reportage on ISIS recruitment in Turkey. The U.S. State Department criticized Turkey for such intimidation attempts.[2]

    Arbitrary denial of access[edit]
    Tukish authorities have been reported as denying access to events and information to journalists for political reasons.[2]

    • In December 2013, after the press had unveiled an alleged corruption scandal involving top government officials, the police department announced the closure of two press rooms in Istanbul and declared that journalists would not be allowed to enter police facilities unless strictly for formal press conferences.[2]
    • 2014 saw a worsening of discriminatory accreditation policies. AKP meetings were off-limits for critical journalists. In case of visits abroad, foreign officials had to hold separate press conferences to allow unaccredited media correspondents.[2]

    Government control over the media[edit]

    See also: Transparency of media ownership in Turkey and Concentration of media ownership in Turkey
    Since 2011, the AKP government has increased restrictions on freedom of speech, freedom of the press and internet use,[28] and television content,[29] as well as the right to free assembly.[30] It has also developed links with media groups, and used administrative and legal measures (including, in one case, a billion tax fine) against critical media groups and critical journalists: "over the last decade the AKP has built an informal, powerful, coalition of party-affiliated businessmen and media outlets whose livelihoods depend on the political order that Erdogan is constructing. Those who resist do so at their own risk."[31]
    These behaviours became particularly prominent in 2013 in the context of the Turkish media coverage of the 2013 protests in Turkey. The BBC noted that while some outlets are aligned with the AKP or are personally close to Erdogan, "most mainstream media outlets - such as TV news channels HaberTurk and NTV, and the major centrist daily Milliyet - are loth to irritate the government because their owners' business interests at times rely on government support. All of these have tended to steer clear of covering the demonstrations."[34] Few channels provided live coverage – one that did was Halk TV.[35] Several private media outlets were reported as engaging in self-censorship due to political pressures. The 2014 local and presidential elections exposed the extent of biased coverage by progovernment media.[2]
    Direct control over state media[edit]
    The state-run Anadolu Agency and the Turkish Radio and Television Corporation (TRT) have also been criticized by media outlets and opposition parties, for acting more and more like a mouthpiece for the ruling AKP, a stance in stark violation of their requirement as public institutions to report and serve the public in an objective way.[94]
    In 2014 the TRT, the state broadcaster, as well as the state-owned Anadolu Agency, were subject to stricter controls. Even RTÜK warned TRT for disproportionate coverage of the AKP; the Supreme Board of Elections fined the public broadcaster for not reporting at all on presidential candidates other than Erdoğan, between August 6 and 8. The Council of Europe observers reported concern about the unfair media advantage for the incumbent ruling party.[2]
    Pro-governmental "Pool Media"[edit]
    During its 12-year rule, the ruling AKP has gradually expanded its control over media.[12] Today, numerous newspapers, TV channels and internet portals also dubbed as Yandaş Medya ("Partisan Media") or Havuz Medyası ("Pool Media") continue their heavy pro-government propaganda.[13] Several media groups receive preferential treatment in exchange for AKP-friendly editorial policies.[14] Some of these media organizations were acquired by AKP-friendly businesses through questionable funds and processes.[15]
    Leaked telephone calls between high ranking AKP officials and businessmen indicate that government officials collected money from businessmen in order to create a "pool media" that will support AKP government at any cost.[95][96] Arbitrary tax penalties are assessed to force newspapers into bankruptcy—after which they emerge, owned by friends of the president. According to a recent investigation by Bloomberg,[97] Erdogan forced a sale of the once independent daily Sabah to a consortium of businessmen led by his son-in-law.[98]
    Leading pro-AKP newspapers are Yeni Şafak, Akit, Sabah, Star, Takvim, Akşam, Türkiye, Milli Gazete, Güneş, and Milat, among others. Leading pro-AKP TV channels are Kanal 7, 24, Ülke TV, TRT, ATV, TGRT, Sky Turk 360, TV Net, NTV, TV8, Beyaz TV, Kanaltürk, and Kanal A. Leading pro-government internet portals are Haber 7, Habervaktim and En Son Haber. Leading pro-AKP news agencies are state owned Anadolu Agency and İhlas News Agency.

    Direct pressures and self-censorship of major media outlets[edit]
    Major media outlets in Turkey belong to certain group of influential businessman or holdings. In nearly all cases, these holding companies earn only a small fraction of their revenue from their media outlets, with the bulk of profits coming from other interests, such as construction, mining, finance, or energy.[99] Therefore, media groups usually practice self-censorship to protect their wider business interests.
    Media not friendly to the AKP are threatened with intimidation, inspections and fines.[16] These media group owners face similar threats to their other businesses.[17] An increasing number of columnists have been fired for criticizing the AKP leadership.[18][19][20][21]
    In addition to the censorship practiced by pro-government media such as Sabah, Yeni Şafak, and Star, the majority of other newspapers, such as Sözcü, Zaman, Milliyet, and Radikal have been reported as practicing self-censorship to protect their business interests and using the market share (65% of the total newspapers sold daily in Turkey as opposed to pro-government media[100]) to avoid retaliatory action by the AKP government of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.[101]
    During the period before the Turkish local elections of 2014, a number of phone calls between prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and media executives were leaked to the internet.[102] Most of the recordings were between Edoğan and Habertürk newspaper & TV channel executive Fatih Saraç. In those recordings, it can be heard that Erdoğan was calling Fatih Saraç when he was unhappy about a news item published in the newspaper or broadcast on TV. He was demanding Fatih Saraç to be careful next time or censor any particular topics he is not happy about.[103] At another leaked call, Erdoğan gets very upset and angry over a news published at Milliyet newspaper and reacts harshly to Erdoğan Demirören, owner of the newspaper. Later, it can be heard that Demirören is reduced to tears.[104] During a call between Erdoğan and editor-in-chief of Star daily Mustafa Karaalioğlu, Erdoğan lashes out at Karaalioğlu for allowing Mehmet Altan to continue writing such critical opinions about a speech the prime minister had delivered recently. In the second conversation, Erdoğan is heard grilling Karaalioğlu over his insistence on keeping Hidayet Şefkatli Tuksal, a female columnist in the paper despite her critical expressions about him.[105] Later, both Altan and Tuksal got fired from Star newspaper. Erdoğan acknowledged that he called media executives.[106]
    In 2014, direct pressures from the executive and the Presidency have led to the dismissal of media workers for their critical articles. Bianet records over 339 journalists and media workers being laid off or forced to quit in the year - several of them due to political pressures.[2]

    • In August 2014 Enis Berberoğlu, the editor-in-chief of Hürriyet newspaper, quit the paper right before the Turkish presidential election, 2014. It has been reported that he was forced to resign after a clash with the publishing company Doğan Holding, due to Berberoğlu's refusal to fire a columnist. The day before, Erdoğan had publicly criticized the Doğan group. Hürriyet denied pressures related to the case.[2]



    TO BE CONTINUED...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-26-2018, 09:47 PM
  2. Replies: 82
    Last Post: 10-09-2016, 11:08 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •