Wednesday, July 27, 2016

Turkish journalist Nedim Şener on the Gulen movement


Tuesday, July 19, 2016

Recent Turkey Coup Attempt and the Western Hypocrisy: How the West is Enabling Islamic Extremism

Featured on islamicity.com and iviews.com.

As I have previously written about and dealt with, the Muslim world is in a crisis, and the responsibility for that lies largely with the Muslims themselves. They have to get their act together to ideologically defeat the extremism, and begin a period of Islamic renaissance. But, the West has been a crucial part of this ongoing crisis and does have a significant contribution to it as well, especially with its wrongheaded Mid-East policies.

My thesis is this:  By effectively supporting or conniving coups d'etat or such attempts against democratically elected governments in the Islamic world, or unjustly interfering with or invading otherwise stable Muslim countries, the West is inadvertently helping to produce and prolong the unhealthy conditions that eventually become hotbeds of despicable and heinous extremism coming out of that part of the world.

They did this numerous times, and don’t seem to have learned from the past mistakes: They did this in Iran in 1953; they did this in the latest Egyptian coup; and in the recent Turkish coup attempt, they initially seemed almost supportive of the attempt, until it became clear that the coup was not to be tolerated by the people of Turkey.

Is the West serious about really defeating the Islamic extremism or not?

It seems to me as though there is a huge disconnect between their desires and their actions concerning this matter. You can defeat ISIS militarily, but if you don’t change your flawed policies, and don’t address the problem at its roots, I am afraid, you will not be successful in your “crusade.”

In the immediate aftermath of the recent coup attempt in Turkey, in July 15, 2016, some Western politicians, pundits and commentators were fast to display a familiar tone of brazen hypocrisy and anti-democratic stance regarding the said attempt.

Some were openly celebrating the would-be putsch and some were effectively justifying it by “buts” and “ifs,” just like they have done with the coup in Egypt by el-Sisi, and yet others were shamelessly dabbling in conspiracy theories. Some of them even seem to be dejected that coup did not pan out.

Since when is a coup a recipe/formula that leads to “democracy”?  Since when is democracy a top-down endeavor? If there is such a democratic-reset button, why don’t we use it more often successfully?

No. A coup puts a prolonged stranglehold on a nation’s (vital) experiments with democracy, and does nothing but delay, worsen, and sweep the problems under the rug. The justifications that are summoned for such coups are never commensurate with, and worthy of, the brutal carnage and the grave consequences they bring about for millions of people for decades to come.

Contrary to the wishes and desires of some in the West, the Turkish people courageously and admirably defended their democracy against a tacitly-Western supported coup, organized by a very deceitful but ambitious cult in Turkey called the Gulen movement (whose leader is residing in the US!). The West does not really know what they are dealing with here.  This is a secretive “Islamist” cult which constantly recruits students, brainwashes and cultivates them to eventually infiltrate government offices, the judiciary, the police and the army, which they did to a good extent in the last three or four decades in Turkey.  

To perhaps make an analogy, this cult is like Opus Dei-Scientology combined, and on steroids, when it comes to how ambitious and secretive they are in their actions and goals of obtaining power and world domination by opening up hundreds of schools in various countries around the world, and brainwashing the kids therein who will become the future cadre of elite in these countries. 

They don't shy away from lying (a practice called taqiyya) as Gulen has very recently done by denying any involvement with the attempted coup. Turkish people, however, know better. As former chief of staff of Turkey, Ilker Basbug, who is a Kemalist by idealogy and definitely not a fan of Erdogan, did recently state, it is the Gulenist fifth column who is behind this coup attempt. 

Gulen has done such denials in many instances in the past. This group did everything to infiltrate the said offices in Turkey, by stealing test-questions-answers for admission tests for government offices, and many other illegal and unethical actions.  

The so-called Western analysts are either not genuinely knowledgeable about what the main problem in Turkey is or misleading their readers on purpose by not providing the relevant and wider context of what is happening in Turkey. For example in a recent piece featured in New York times titled “Erdogan Emerges Strong After Coup Attempt, but Turkey Awaits Next Steps,” the authors write: “Alongside the military, the government also dismissed thousands of judges, who seemingly had no role to play in a military revolt.”  But it is well known in Turkey that the elected government has been struggling against the elements of the Gulen movement, judges included, who had infiltrated into government offices not to serve the people but the Gulen movement’s interests. 

The West drags its feet to acknowledge this.

The golden rule comes to mind: What would the West do if a religious cult purposefully infiltrates their government posts with an ultimate goal of absolute domination?

In spite of all that, the Western media presents him as an ascetic “peaceful Sufi,” and Erdogan’s “legitimate rival” and “scapegoat,” as if one is not just a cleric of a secretive and suspect cult with no more than perhaps 1% of the support of Turkish people, and Erdogan is not a legitimately elected political leader of the Turkish Republic with 52% of the vote. 

Why would Erdogan blaim a “peaceful Sufi” who is living in Pennsylvania, and that to the point of straining American-Turkish relations?  And why is the West so gung-ho about this shady organization? And why don’t they campaign with the same vehemence for the release of democratically elected leader of Egypt, President Morsi, and his cabinet from the dungeons of Egypt? 

The level of anti-Muslim sentiment is so much in the West that the victim of the Turkish coup attempt is portrayed as the guilty party in many an opinion piece. 

Further, everyone who professes to be a conservative democratic Muslim (Erdogan) becomes an “Islamist,” but they do call deranged ISIS members and even the Gulenists “Islamists” as well. So how are ordinary Muslims supposed to make sense of this?  Is the West against Islam and Muslims or just the extremist groups and their fringe ideologies?

Erdogan is unjustly demonized, again, just like was done to Morsi, in the Western media. The West has good relations with bloody and brutal dictators and countries of the Middle East such as el-Sisi and Saudi Arabia, but creates huge hue and cry when Erdogan, as President, uses his law-given right in Turkey to prosecute journalists for defamationnot that I agree with every such action Erdogan takes.  I would in fact grant that in some of his actions, Erdogan does go overboard a bit, but does that in any way justify demonization or even a coup against him?

Regarding the claim that Erdogan has been amassing power for himself: this is in accord with a legitimate political proposal to shift the Turkish political system from parliamentarian democracy to presidential democracy, and if people support this paradigm, why can’t Turkey do it?

Another point the mainstream media puts a spin on is to make this to be just about one person, Erdogan.  The coup attempt was not done just against Erdogan, it was done against the democratic rights of Turkish people. That is the reason these people took it to their hands to resist this illegal act at the risk of getting crushed under the tanks. This also shows the democratic maturity of Turkish people. This resistance to an unjust and undemocratic putsch will also be an example to other “oppressable” peoples of the world.

Is Turkey a mature democracy, and Erdogan a mature democrat? Of course, not.  However, some people criticize Erdogan in such a way as to imply that the pre-Erdogan Turkey was this proverbial Switzerland, or that it is an easy thing to just make perfect democracy out of a country like Turkey---whose realities are much more humble than presumed---and that Erdogan took all that away. But we have to look at a country in its political context, culture, and recent history. 

Turkey under Erdogan extended democratic rights much more widely than ever before. Yes, he needs to resume extending democratic rights and reenact further reforms, and try to achieve some sort of consensus and harmony with the legal opposition elements.

But we should also be cognizant of Turkey’s rugged political landscape: as Erdogan set out to introduce reforms in his early tenure, he did not find co-operating and willing partners in this endeavor: there was an unruly coup-prone military, a fatal enemy (the Kurdish PKK), a secretive and invidious cult (Gulenists) in the guts of the Turkish State, and sclerotic opposition political parties.

It must be admitted that Erdogan’s party was responsible, and carries part of the blame, for helping and promoting the Gulen movement, not suspecting the possibility that one day this movement was going to also try to bring down the whole country to its knees.

However, it must be recognized that Erdogan and his cabinet are currently the only hope toward establishing a model of a viable democratic Muslim country, and not the dictators that the West has no problems being friends with.  A second hope was Egypt's Morsi but they quashed this democratically elected leader and his party (with tacit Western support), killing thousands of protestors and dissenters, and jailing many more, and suspending Egypt’s chance to experiment with democracy.

And then we wonder why ‘Ayman al-Zawahiri’s come out of such toxic environments. If the West does not start realizing this, they will not be successful against the horrendous extremism coming out of this part of the world. 

We have to give Muslim-democracies (not an American version or European version) room, and a break, and stop messing with the Islamic world by undemocratic actions and supporting of dictators.  


Thursday, June 2, 2016

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Big Spin, Not Big Bang!

My spacetime-rotation model of the universe (see my papers in arXiv and blog posts here) proposes, effectively, to replace Big Bang with a more "natural" Big Spin which, although its own origin needs to be dealt with, does capably unify, and naturally and physically explain many seemingly unrelated and confusing outstanding cosmological problems: the cosmic inflation, dark energy, dark matter, and the "mysterious" intrinsic spin (angular momentum) of elementary particles, and the physical meaning and origin of Hubble's constant and Planck's constant. Again, please see my original dark energy-dark matter papers on arXiv for details.

Here I would like to share with you something very exciting that I came across very recently about one of the founding theoreticians of the Big Bang theory:  George Gamow.

After I came up with my rotary model of the universe, without any prior knowledge of the literature, in October 2010, I learned from Wikipedia that Kurt Godel had (in 1949) a rotary model of the universe that, although useful as an exercise in general relativity, goes counter to our daily experiences due to its infamous closed timelike curves, allowing time travel into the past and a disturbing possibility of messing up with the causal chain of events, which we don't seem to experience. Furthermore, Godel's model, in general, does not result in an expanding universe, and hence the issues of dark energy and dark matter are absent. 

That is because Godel's universal rotation is like that of the solar system, whereas my model proposes a rotating space-time, which naturally produces inertial effects that we, unknowingly, call dark energy and dark matter.

Anyways, at the beginning of this year, I read somewhere online that there is a possibility that Kurt Godel got his cue about a rotational cosmic model from a letter sent to the editors of Nature magazine a few years earlier, in 1946, by the brilliant George Gamow about the possibility of a rotating universe.

I immediately ordered a copy of this paper through our interlibrary loan service. Below I will paste it as a picture. Please take a look at it, and note how my "Dark energy and Dark matter as Inertial Effects" paper does point out the same thing as Gamow mentions, particularly, about the shapes of galaxies and how a rotational universe would naturally explain them. I found this to be very interesting and exciting, and more important, profoundly encouraging.





What is the Origin of Intrinsic Quantum Spin?

Spin quantum number is the fourth parameter needed to uniquely describe the quantum state of a, say, fermion such as an electron. It was originally postulated by the brilliant, albeit caustic, Austrian physicist Wolfgang Pauli. Shortly afterwards some physicists interpreted it as self-rotation. Pauli himself was not happy with this interpretation because a quick calculation shows that such a mechanical supposition requires a superluminal rotation of the electron's "surface," which goes counter to the dictates of the special theory of relativity.

So how is quantum spin explained then? Is there a physical model for it?

The standard answer to these questions is that we are supposed to think of quantum spin as a two-valued intrinsic quantum degree of freedom, corresponding to an "intrinsic" angular momentum, with no classical analog. And the majority of physicists follow this catechism.

But I don't!

When self-rotation so neatly explains the two-valuedness (clockwise-counterclockwise), and the angular momentum aspect of this phenomenon that I do question the validity of Pauli's (and others') concern about the faster-than-light rotation. The special theory of relativity puts a speed limit only on the propagation of causal information. I don't think electron's spinning faster-than-light can be harnessed to breach that limit.  After all, we are familiar with many superluminal but non-causal events: Isn't it true, for example, that quantum entanglement can travel faster than light? Or that there are galaxies in our universe that are receding from us superluminally?

Having presented my perspective on quantum spin,  I would like to now go one step further and ask what the primal origin, the cause or the source of this, fundamentally two-valued, spin is, which, one has to note, is possessed universally by all elementary particles.

Again, why is it that it will be either parallel or antiparallel to a given measurement axis? How is possible that all the fundamental particles have the same property, which never dissipates?

My answer to these questions is to do with my cosmological model that unifies and explains, in one stroke, both the dark energy and dark matter, namely the Big Spin. As those of you who have read my two papers (see arXiv.org) on the topic, and a blog post here, will recall that I have proposed a globally rotating space-time model, that I call the Big Spin, which is a natural cause of the early cosmic inflation, and the relatively recent accelerated expansion of the universe and the galaxy rotation curve anomalies.

I hereby do posit that, in addition to being a strong and natural candidate to explain our outstanding dark energy and dark matter dual problems, a Big-Spin model does also naturally explain the origin of "intrinsic" angular momentum of elementary particles. That is because these particles at the initial singularity started to spin with a gargantuan primordial angular momentum of the Big Spin, not Big Bang!, with superluminal rotation speeds. As the universe expanded, the spin orientations  got thermalized and hence the current two-valued, clockwise-counterclockwise characteristics.

Monday, March 28, 2016

Western Media Awash in Disinformation and Hogwash about Turkey

As someone originally from Turkey (of Kurdish background) who follows the international news fairly closely, I have been particularly alarmed by the level of unfair and grossly inaccurate journalism vis-a-vis Turkey, post-Arab Spring.

Here is a country that----under Erdogan's leadership----managed to turn its past economic and democratic dismal-self around remarkably in the last decade or so, and became, for the last couple of years, perhaps the most humanitarian of all governments, by allowing, and taking care of, some 3 million Syrian and Iraqi (Arabs, Kurds, Yezidis, Christians etc.) refugees  into its territory.

But according to the most Western media, Turkey seems to be a horrible place where journalists are jailed and minorities are oppressed.  I urge you to investigate all these claims, looking at the arguments from both sides, not just the smug claims made by some in the Western media. For example, many of the journalists or people in question would face similar, if not worse, litigations in the West (Judith Miller and Edward Snowden come to mind).

Furthermore, you need to know the culture of the country itself to make sense of what is happening there. Some people (in Turkey and the West) think that insulting and defaming people's reputation publicly is part of freedom of speech. How can that be? Why do we have defamation laws, for instance in the West, available to anyone who feel their reputation is publicly tarnished?

One gets a sense that the pre-Erdogan Turkey was like the proverbial Switzerland, but Erdogan took all that away. Whereas those of us with some fair sense of judgement who happened to have lived in pre-Erdogan Turkey, knows very well that it was a God-forsaken country both economically and democratically. It would be an insult to human intelligence to even compare today's Turkey to that of old Turkey. But, alas, that is exactly what the Western media is doing.