Turkey heading for religious cyber-censorship

[Skybird]

According to a German article in Die Welt,
http://www.welt.de/webwelt/article5428461/Jeder-Tuerke-erhaelt-eine-E-Mail-Adresse-vom-Staat.html
Turkey's new-born babies will get an email-adress from the near future on, which also is printed into the passport and ID papers. It should be valid for a lifetime. The already existing population should follow. At the same time, foreign services like Google, Yahoo and others will be forbidden and banned.

Controls of ID papers are common in Turkey, and citizens are required by law to always carry their papers with them. Since the state-given email-adress (featuring 10 GB webspace) not only should supress foreign influence in the internet in turkey, but should also be used for written communication between the state and the citizens, as well as amongst the citizens themselves, police controls of ID paper in the future could include a check of persons' internet communication as well, to see if they are ignoring letters by state offices - and to check their personal emails.

Turkey already runs a huge program to monitor the internet. thousands of pages commonly used in other countries, are banned. the turkish state says the initiative raises Turkey'S national security, since currently all emial traffic runs via servers in foreign countries. But it must be feared that it also means increasing censorship (which already is note rare). If the planned additonal state-run services must be used in Turkey to send emails, this means that security agencies can easily co-read personal mails. the feared raise in censorship is motivated by the creeping fundamentalising of the country by Erdogan's AKP. They also plan a state-run islam-compatible search engine to replace Google, that will automaically surpoess and fileer all content that is seen as unislamic and as an offence to Islam or Muhammad. Such an search-engine already exists, but currently attracts only few visitors, the german article says. the planned initiative will make the use of it mandatory, since foreign services will be terminated by the state.

Turkey is the country that just days ago called the Swiss a fascist country that is commiting crimes against humanity. It wants into the EU, where it would become one of the most powerful nations, due to its population size (biggest in the EU, then) and the formula of the EU favouring population size in EU votes, at the same time being one of the weakest economies in and finacial contributors to the EU. The Turkish president Erdogan has called Turkish migrants in Germany to actively resist integration.

Earlier this year I was told that the Turkish religion ministry is preparing such a move. But it was unreliable, personal report only. I thought the guy telling me, a Turkish ex-collegue of mine, is kidding. It seems he was not. At least it sheds some light on where this initiave really is coming from.

Right now, they already have bans of websites and censorship of "offending" content, but not so systematically as they plan to do it now. Right now, there are loopholes the knowing mind and the informed amateur can use. This is planned to become impossible in the future, if the religious fundamentalists around Erdogan get their way.

I could imagine the EU to follow in some not too far away future, regarding the banning of Islam-critical content. That would truly improve relationships with Islamic countries. The EU already has made criticism of religion in general and islam in special a crime, labelling it discrimination.

[AVGWarhawk]

Can SS be viewed in Turkey?

[Skybird]

Don't know whether or not they ban Nazi stuff, too. But in many Arab places they love Nazis, because Hitler really showed the Jews where to go, didn't he, ha!

[Shearwater]

Sounds great. I've heard that East Anatolians are among the world's most avid internet users.

[Oberon]

I know what China will be doing next then... :haha:

[Tribesman]

The EU already has made criticism of religion in general and islam in special a crime, labelling it discrimination.

Can you point out that law?

[Oberon]

Perhaps this should be shoehorned into the Buckingham Palace thread.

We all know where this is going and it'd be better off with the rest of the same style of posts in the Buckingham Palace thread.

Mods....please? :up:

[Snestorm]

Thank you, Skybird.
Very educational, and interesting, thread.

[Tribesman]

Very educational, and interesting, thread.
Yes educational in the fact that Skybird again felt the need to write things that are not true to make his point.

[XabbaRus]

OK please lets not let this get to be a flame fest.

[Skybird]

FYI,

I have Tribesman on "ignore" since Thursday night, after half a year I simply was tired of it.

I recommend everybody to simply ignore people trolling the board, and not knowing or intentionally ignoring the difference between being clear in their speech, and being unpolite or even rude.

This board shows many examples of people who disagree with each other, or with me, on things of political or religious content as well as controversial issues like war and economy and ecology. But still most people communicate in a polite way, and accept these disagreements. That so many can behave like that naturally, is the major reason why the subsim forums are such a great forum on the web. Some people just cannot play that way, they try to ruin any thread they do not like by behaving noisy, by cheating, pointing fingers, offending people, telling lies about people, intentionally misinterpreting them, quoting them out of context, putting statements into in their mouths that never have been said that way - all this only to give somebody a bad name and discredit him.

I currently have ten names on my ignore list. What they all have in common, is the above descirption. Ignoring them has added tremednously to the board's peace, and my peace of mind as well. It is no censoring of opinion, but not tolerating bad behavior and unpoliteness. It is not beeing too weak to bear somebody disgreeing, it is simply clever not to have to waste one's time with noting the bad style of somebody else time and again.

Behavior, or lack of, is no surrogate for an argument, and trolling is someting that cannot be adressed by trying to communicate with it. One can be clear and determined in what one wishes to say without becoming rude or cheating towards the other.

Most people understand this. Some don't. Ignore the latter. That is not weak, but wise. I'm sure most of you do like that in your real lives anyway.


Xabba,

feel free to close the thread if you see the need arising, I will not be angry over that. I did not wish to start a new long debate, but just to direct attention to a news information that for us in Europe is of direct and immediate interest and could potentially affect us all (that's why I kept it separate from the stuck Buckingham Palace thread). This thread is more "read only" than "debate, please".

[heartc]

Don't know whether or not they ban Nazi stuff, too. But in many Arab places they love Nazis, because Hitler really showed the Jews where to go, didn't he, ha!

LOL. I'm pretty sure AVGWarhawk meant SS as in SubSim, not the Nazi SS.

Unfortunately, you won't learn this until next time curiosity gets the better of you and you temporarily disable your "ignore list", to read all the real talking points while pretending you can't hear them, so that you won't have to respond to uncomfortable points.

[NeonSamurai]

Can SS be viewed in Turkey?

With the criticism of the one true faith found here, They probably blocked Subsim a while back.


Gotta love censorship :nope: I wonder when they are going to start implanting locator chips into their citizens so they know their every move, preferably with thought monitors so that they can find all the unbelievers.

[Letum]

I do hope I have made it to SB's ignore list.
If not; must try harder.

[Skybird]

I do hope I have made it to SB's ignore list.
If not; must try harder.
No chance, mate. You're just not mean enough. :O: You are just a bit... complicated... :)

[Skybird]

With the criticism of the one true faith found here, They probably blocked Subsim a while back.


Gotta love censorship :nope: I wonder when they are going to start implanting locator chips into their citizens so they know their every move, preferably with thought monitors so that they can find all the unbelievers.

SubSim. Oh my, now you made me look like an idiot.

I thought he was about the SS (Nazi context) when replying to him. :88)

:har:

[Letum]

http://www.b3tards.com/u/57a418c694bc7c6296b3/ub2.jpg


/aiming for the list!

[NeonSamurai]

Ooo my turn my turn <pulls out his list of Shakespearean insults>

Thou crusty batch of nature!
Thou elvish-mark'd abortive rooting hog!
Scratching could not make it worse.. such a face as yours.
I was searching for a fool when i found you.
Out you green-sickness carrion!

[Letum]

Don't tell him your name NeonSamurai!

[NeonSamurai]

Shhhhhhh! :D

[Oberon]

:har::har::har::har::har:

[ETR3(SS)]

Can SS be viewed in Turkey?
I'm gonna say yes for the moment.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1213835&postcount=60

[Skybird]

Ooo my turn my turn <pulls out his list of Shakespearean insults>

Thou crusty batch of nature!
Thou elvish-mark'd abortive rooting hog!
Scratching could not make it worse.. such a face as yours.
I was searching for a fool when i found you.
Out you green-sickness carrion!
Shakespeare!? I feel honoured!

Letum, you must become much, much meaner if you want to get on the list. I honestly doubt that you have what it takes. :O:

[Tribesman]

I have Tribesman on "ignore" since Thursday night, after half a year I simply was tired of it.
Oh no, that means I can no longer point out when you are simply making things up
Hold on, thats not right is it? Surely it doesn't work like that?
Ah I get it now.
It just means that you will go on posting in the topic in the same vein without realising it is noted that you are writing stuff that is simply not true.:rotfl2:

[August]

I do hope I have made it to SB's ignore list.
If not; must try harder.

All the really cool kids are on it. :yep:

[CaptainHaplo]

Well durn August, that means I gotta break out my old broken glasses, retape em and find that darn old pocket protector too. Some too short pants (never know when there might be a flood). Just cuz I can't be cool enough to be on the list.

Though honestly, I get on pretty good with Sky, though we do disagree at times.

[August]

Well durn August, that means I gotta break out my old broken glasses, retape em and find that darn old pocket protector too. Some too short pants (never know when there might be a flood). Just cuz I can't be cool enough to be on the list.

Give me your lunch money 4 eyes! :arrgh!:

Though honestly, I get on pretty good with Sky, though we do disagree at times.

You'd make a great diplomat Hap. Me, well, I guess I just can't keep from calling a spade a spade.

[Schroeder]

Oh no, that means I can no longer point out when you are simply making things up...

It just means that you will go on posting in the topic in the same vein without realising it is noted that you are writing stuff that is simply not true.:rotfl2:
I would be way more willing to believe in what you say if you were finally telling people where you get your info from. If everything Skybird says is made up or untrue then show us the counter evidence! So far you have only be claiming while Skybird put up links to where he got his info from (one might agree or disagree with his sources but at least he tells us where it is from). If you want me to believe you more than Skybird maybe you should start to point to your sources. I'm writing an application right now and I have to state my sources all the time. If I don't, my Professor will not accept that passage and regard it as if it wasn't there.

[Skybird]

I would be way more willing to believe in what you say if you were finally telling people where you get your info from.
Good luck while waiting. Some of us are waiting for that since last summer when he was very pressingly asked by me and one or two others more to reveal his qualifications. He said he must not, and eggdanced around mysterious implications that it would be wise if we just assume that qualification does exist. I only say to that that much of the stuff he claimed and said is rightout wrong, and reveals a stellar lack of background knowledge, else he would not fall for just superficial points so often that he does not and cannot put into context, nevertheless blowing them up in size and meaning. I see him as a troll, and I just recommend to stop paying attention to him.

If you want me to believe you more than Skybird maybe you should start to point to your sources.

Hell, you should not just believe me or anyone else. Form an educated opinion yourself by reading some basic works on your own. You must not read as excessively as I did, but you are German, I can recommend you two or three German books by Raddatz that I have recommended before, since he is both very thorough and insightful, and also very precise in giving his links and sources in Islamic scripture and it's context. that is a good and solid base to found your own opinion on. I certainly do not wish that you just believe me something because I say so.

http://www.amazon.de/Von-Gott-Allah-Hans-Peter-Raddatz/dp/3776622121/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260114712&sr=8-11

http://www.amazon.de/Allah-Terror-Djihad-Deformierung-Westens/dp/377662289X/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_c

This is some of the best summarising literature on Islam that I know of both in German and English language, and it compares direcly to the Christian church as well. Not too easy to read, I admit, but of very high standard, and extremely well-founded.

Raddatz, amongst other, is an academically trained "Orientalist" and was close personal student of some of the best qualified Franco-German authorities for the academical research on Islam. IMO he has surpassed them.

If you want to read the Quran, be advised that that only makes sense with plenty of secondary literature accompanying that, else too much important details and background will escape your attention necessarily. It's a bit - complicated, and more difficult than to read the New Testament, for example. It already starts with controversial translation issues. I recommend to start with summarising literature on the general case of Islam that is qualified to stand the test of academic standards. there is much amateur work out there that illustrates the author is thinking that it already is good enough to just have good intentions regarding the integration of islam, and that wish would make a good book, but these works most often are incredibly wishful, and shallow. Many others have a very PC bias.

[Schroeder]

Hell, you should not just believe me or anyone else. Form an educated opinion yourself by reading some basic works on your own.

And that is why I ask for sources.;)

[Mikhayl]

Still peddling the Raddatz fraud uh? That guy's work is so important that he's a total unknown outside of Germany. The only non-German references to this guy on the internets are on white supremacist blogs and racist websites like FrontPageMag and the like who, unsurprisingly, have the same consideration for him as Skybird.

[Skybird]

Counter him in argument instead by attempted character assassination.

BTW, he is so unknown that he is one of the most asked German-tongued contributors and co-editors of the Encyclopedia on Islam in five volumes (the second version published in English and French only) - and undisputed academic standard work. He is also the most asked analysts on the matter in German-languaged Europe. And a political advisor to German parties, mainly the CDU (he himself holds no party membership).

BTW, I once have even read Albert Schweitzer being quoted on a white supremacist website.

Again, counter him in argument instead of character assassination. I hold every bet that he knows his stuff way much better than you and me and we all together. He is certainly against the PC propaganda crowd, but that is not excuse to cheat him. If it is so wrong what he says, it should be easy for you to show him wrong, right?

The only non-German references to this guy on the internets are on white supremacist blogs and racist websites

That's a wrong and unfair diffamation that shows more about your self than about anyone else. In fact he is actively contributing to various media outlets, some of which are mass media, and quoted and linked to from other places as well. He is also sometimes on radio, Deutschlandfunik for the most. Over time you could have read him in the FAZ, Die Welt, Der Spiegel, to mention just the most widespread ones.

Prove his references and his information and his arguments wrong - or step aside.

[Tribesman]

I would be way more willing to believe in what you say if you were finally telling people where you get your info from.
Info comes from many places
If everything Skybird says is made up or untrue then show us the counter evidence!
Where have I said that? I have only said tha Skybird makes things up to fit his arguement , I have not said that everything he says is made up.
If you paid attention you might notice I specicificly ask skybird to back up his claims ...as in those c;aims that are obviously false , the most common of which lately is easily demonstrated by the simple question "what law?".
On no occasion has Skybird attempted to try and justify the falsehoods he has written, instead we get.... i went to muslim countries ....i read books...you are ignorant.

one might agree or disagree with his sources but at least he tells us where it is from
Actually no he doesn't, in the main he sticks to non contentious issues for which you can provide a whole library of sources, but the non contentious issues do not make point.
When he wants to make a point he invariablty heads towards a very small number of sources. The most common of which takes specific points from a very respected, very well established scholar who is reknowned world wide.
Every time that scholars works are used to "prove" a specific bit of scriptue means "A".
Just about every time the scholars work really shows that the scripture cannot possibly mean "A" but it is omitted.
The fact that the "proof" version is so widely accepted and circulated does not give it credibility .
However the fact that the Jewish scholar of Islam rejects the misuse and misrepresentation of his studies and takes legal actions against the crazy racist hate sites that claim to use his work...well that speaks volumes doesn't it.

So schroeder, Skybird does write some good stuff on Islam but really lets himself down badly, I however could be far more critical on many aspects of Islam(after all there are sommany things to get your teeth into).
But. That should be a big ...
But
I would not have to make up ****e to make my point like Skybird does.

If you are in doubt then do a simple search for skybirds "claims", match them to the "claims" on Jihadwatch.
Then take the step to the Jihadwatch scholarly source
Then you can see why that source is really ********d offwith Jihadwatch and its misrepresentation of his studies.

[Tribesman]

The only non-German references to this guy on the internets are on white supremacist blogs and racist websites Do not knock Skybirds sources, just errrrrr....comment on the reliabilty and objectivity of his sources:rotfl2:

[Mikhayl]

BTW, he is so unknown that he is one of the most asked German-tongued contributors and co-editors of the Encyclopedia on Islam in five volumes (the second version published in English and French only) - and undisputed academic standard work.

Where do you get that information from? The Encyclopedia of Islam is in 14 volumes (12 + indexes), it's the Encyclopedia on the Qur'an that is in 6 volumes (5 + index). I have found two references to Raddatz in one of the 6 volumes, two quotes from a book from 1971, nothing else. And there's no mention of his name on Brill's website (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Afr%3Aofficial&q=raddatz+site%3Awww.brill.nl&aq=f&oq=&aqi=)
I don't have the Encyclopedia of Islam, but if you do you might want to check for those missing volumes, that thing costs an arm.
(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Afr%3Aofficial&q=raddatz+site%3Awww.brill.nl&aq=f&oq=&aqi=)

[Mikhayl]

Do not knock Skybirds sources, just errrrrr....comment on the reliabilty and objectivity of his sources:rotfl2:

Yeah, this one really reeks of intellectual dishonnesty and deception. I found the Encyclopedia of Islam on the net, Raddatz is indeed technically a "co-author" of this book as he has a whopping one contribution in one page in one volume out of the 12.
http://www.archive.org/stream/EI2-v1-v13/EI-2-V-9_djvu.txt

He is certainly NOT "co-editor" as Skybird claimed, and funnily enough, FrontPageMag and various blogs use the same deception to make him look like a major contributor (emphasis mine):
Peter Raddatz, a German scholar of Islamic Studies and the co-author of the renowned “Encyclopaedia of Islam.”http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=5347

Also notice that in both Encyclopedia, the same book from 1971 is referenced, so even his tiny presence in the Encyclopedia doesn't say anything about the value or lack of of his recent work, which I can't judge directly since I don't speak German.

But given that the man's work is superior to that of Annemarie Schimmel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annemarie_Schimmel), I have no doubt his books will be translated into several languages very soon. After all, "von Allah zum Terror" has only been published in 2002, it shouldn't take too long now should it?

[Skybird]

Where do you get that information from? The Encyclopedia of Islam is in 14 volumes (12 + indexes), it's the Encyclopedia on the Qur'an that is in 6 volumes (5 + index). I have found two references to Raddatz in one of the 6 volumes, two quotes from a book from 1971, nothing else. And there's no mention of his name on Brill's website (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Afr%3Aofficial&q=raddatz+site%3Awww.brill.nl&aq=f&oq=&aqi=)
I don't have the Encyclopedia of Islam, but if you do you might want to check for those missing volumes, that thing costs an arm.
(http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Afr%3Aofficial&q=raddatz+site%3Awww.brill.nl&aq=f&oq=&aqi=)

I had several volumes of the first edition, and yes, these books were old, and precious. I sold them because I have no professional interest in them, and only initially used them, but it is very difficult to make use of them if you are no full time insider of the matter. I had bought one book only, the others were heritage from my grandfather.

Got over 250 bucks per volume. :)

There is a new second edition released over many years, with many more vo,mues, I am not sure how many. With that I am not familiar. Raddatz has contributed to this new edition, I assume on his fields of special interest.

Indeed he was close student (the "prince") of Annemarie Schimmel, but the two separated over a personal row, when Raddatz and her disagreed on her more compromising attitude on several contradictory aspects that Raddatz was not willing to ignore. Annemarie Schimmel is seen as an authority of modern "Orientalistik" and science on Islam in german language, and europe.

Whether his books will be translated or not I do not know, since his books are not PC and the man raises controversy for attacking popular opinions representing the mainstream attitude of spending tolerance for Islam that in Raddatz's arguments are not deserved and even self-damaging.

There are many English standard works that are not translated into French or German as well, so whether or not something is translated into English is not a decisive criterion. just think of russian and chinese scientists.

Until WWII, the Franco-German tradition on islamic research and what we call "Orientalistik" over here has been a major alternative to the anglosaxon traditon of these research branches that since the has gained academic dominance.

"Von Allah zum Terror" is somewhat the sucessor to "Von Gott zu Allah". The latter is the one that defines the basis of Raddatz' historical references by comparing christian and islamic history and basic thinking of both systems' theology. a superb start for begin with. I would make it a mandatory reading for politicians, priest seminaries and and institutions of public education dealing with the matters of islam and comparing religions. I say again that it is possibly the best introduction you can get in German language. And yes, it is violating the consense of the PC crowd - that'S why it is seen as controversial by some. But all public mainstream discussion of Islam is basing on huge informational deficits and PC slogans, so the controversy cannot surprise at all.

P.S. I had the old edition of the Encyclopedia and alway slived by the impression that it were the complete volumes. It was oublished in the tens of thirties of past century and Raddatz obviously had not contributed to it, but the new one, published since the seventies. I have read several of Raddatz contributions to that, but quoted in secondary sources, not the original that I never owned or leased. So it is possible that I indeed put too much trust into seocndary sources claiming him to be co-editor of the encyclopedia. However, I have read and still own several of Raddatz own books. I never read Raddatz commenting himself on his work for the encyclopedia.

Considering the reputation of that encyclopedia, it is hard to image that they would invite somebody to contribute if he does not know a bit more thna just the special stuff he eites about, or would be seen as a political radicalist bringing the whole encyclopedia into discredit. Hardly just anybody would be invited to add to the ecyclopedia.

so Mikhayl in this regard has caused some just correction in my percpetion. In these specific details I stand corrected.

[Skybird]

And just btw, when you now admit that you are not familiar with Raddatz' work and aguments

, which I can't judge directly since I don't speak German.


why did you feel you had to ridicule and diffame him in your earlier postings, although you obviously do not know the object of your condemnation? One can try that with a general trend, a school, a tradition of thinking, but when one is picking individual names of authors from that, one should know what these authors actually are saying, and why, don't you think. and encyclopdeia back and forth, obviously I know Raddatz work a little bit better than you do. Because different to you I have read several of his own books. so if oyu want to discredit Raddatz, counter his arguments. Many try that, btw, and it is claimed they are right, but I cannot see very many succeeding. different to popular accusations, he refers a lot to Isamci nsources themselves, and different to popular criticsm he always refers to the wider context of these sources and the pieces he take from them. that's what makes some appendices i his books really intimidating, but I assume most simply ignore them and then forget that they are there.

See, I admitted my misled information basis on the encyclopedia thing when you raised an argument/information/link that I could not counter. I have no problem to do so when something convinces me or conclusions leave me no other choice than to change my view. Just to set up random claims, even claims that are in violation of things that I am sure to have a better informational background on then the other according to what he reveals about his sources, or claims that just parrot some hear-say and popular slogans - that is a way of doing that does not convince me.

I am no web specialist like Avalon Lady was, she had a link for EVERYTHING, it seems. :D My background are books, and travel experiences, for the most, and books much more than the internet to which I came relatively late. these two formed the background of my thinking and understanding these matters, and on this basis, and some first hand events in my real life that I repeatedly explained, I argue and "operate".