Robert Spencer vs. Mustafa Akyol

Dear Mustafa Akyol,

Can I congratulate you again on your fantastic story in Frontpage about the heroic peace activists who sailed with the aid flotilla to Gaza last week?
You are right, they are just stopping those ships to harass those poor Palestinians as is shown in this video; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az1HW0sGkEo&feature=channel

I was wondering if you could do a follow up as the Zionists are planting all sort of disturbing propaganda on the internet.

They have released footage from Al-Jazeera TV were participants can be seen preparing themselves, invoking the killing of Jews and chanting “Khaibar, Khaibar, oh Jews!
The army of Muhammad will return!"
as shown here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3L7OV414Kk&feature=player_embedded#!.
I have also seen doctored video of a flotilla passenger claiming he wants to be a Shahid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSAxAj2KIdU
These video must have been staged by the occupiers of AL Quds as all those people were peace activists, had no intention to be violent and are certainly not members of a group linked with terrorist groups such as Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood as claimed by a former French investigative judge and a Danish newspaper.

I am also glad you did not explore the link between the IHH members and the AKP of Recep Tayyip Erdogan who is trying to stir up nationalistic pride to gain support at home and increase the popularity for his party, which will be fighting a hotly contested election in July 2011. This sort of intellectual misinformation only confuses the masses.

I have found those Zionist terrorists have no shame and are trying to discredit the peaceful activists by placing fake video of activists attacking the Israeli commandos with metal pipes and knives.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2duPV9MQIc
and here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo&feature=related
And here, preparing rods, slingshots, broken bottles and metal objects to attack IDF soldiers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZlSSaPT_OU&feature=player_embedded
Of course these are all Zionist plants and I am sure the evidence has been fabricated.

What does confuse me a bit though is the statement of Greta Berlin, a co-founder of the Free Gaza movement, who said "Our mission is to break the blockade of Gaza". Also, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh said the Islamic militants have refused to accept any aid from the Israeli-intercepted flotilla. “We are not seeking to fill our [bellies], we are looking to break the Israeli siege on Gaza.”
Now, I thought you said this was all about humanitarian aid for the starving people of Gaza.

As for the Zionist propaganda machine, it is working overtime. They have even made up this Palestinian website at http://www.paltoday.ps/arabic/News-64161.html and have bribed a Danish reporter to lie about the terrible situation in Gaza at
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http://www.steffen-jensen.dk/dan/blogartikler/134--mere-mangel-pa-arbejde-end-pa-mad/&sl=da&tl=en

What is worse, they are even trying to slander those brave Turkish humanitarian aid workers by publishing the Turkish Human Rights record showing the treatment of the Kurds in Turkey and stating that Jenin, the Second Lebanon War and every armed encounter between Israel and Islamic terrorists over the last 20 years combined killed fewer people, than Turkey did in 1997 alone.
How dare they compare the actions of those brave Turks with those Zionists!
Some of those liars even write that Turkey is hypocritical as it itself has blockaded Armenia for the last 16 years.

Lucky enough Reuters (The press agency that violated its own rules by cropping vital context, knives and blood, out of the Gaza raid photos) and AP refuse to cover the incriminating fact that the financier behind all this, Saudi Arabia, is itself involved in a naval blockade of South Yemen where a strict blockade of food, medicine and international aid and arbitrary aerial bombing of civilian areas has already resulted in 250,000 internal refugees and who knows how many casualties.
Of course I do not believe those lies. If this were true you would report this and the ‘peace flotilla’ with all those heroic ‘peace activist’ would sail immediately for Yemen.

Keep it up!
As a famous propa...uh information minister once said;
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

Great rebuttal by Robert Spencer.

India is generously infested with such "liberal" Muslims who are also "pro justice", who always manage to somehow sympathize with all sorts of violent, hate filled people and organizations and lay the blame on governments of India, Israel and the USA, for the most murderous attacks on peaceful civilians who are simply going about their daily life.

They are, in their hearts of hearts, no better than the worst of Islamist supremacists. But they are clever enough to realize the utility of being part of mainstream society in liberal countries and always try to package their message in liberal, "pro justice" terms, but miraculously the final message is always that the terrorists are actually the victims and upholders of civil society and modern day constitutions, the culprits.

Thank God for sites like jihadwatch.

Sanjay

I am looking sharply at the Turkey/Azerbaijan versus Armenia conflict. We may see some developments there, and not necessarily for the good.
I heard some rumors that Armenia and Turkey had come a bit closer, perhaps even that the longstanding Turkish economic blockade of Armenia was about to end. Translation: the Armenians are behaving. There´s the matter of Armenia´s cooperation with Iran too .....
But if the Turks join the muslim countries entirely and give up on EU I see trouble ahead for Armenia. Armenia has been a border buffer state for so long it is a wonder they still exist.

But do not compare the Turkey-Armenia relationship with Palestine! Oh no! The concepts are unrelated! And definitely not to be mentioned in the interest of peace, tolerance, bridge building, interfaith and dialogue.

Mr. Akyol says:

'In other words, I do define myself as a "liberal Muslim," for I uphold individual liberty, and criticize some elements within the Islamic tradition that contradict this value -- things such as the ban on apostasy, the bans on "sinful" things, or the enforcement of certain religious practices.'

Well... so he is going to detach areas of the 'revelation' according to his will. That's to say that he knows better than the prophet of Islam himself. Let him go and say those things to the Muslims of Gaza and even to the arch-mufti of Turkey. Let him see by himself what he has to confront... as Robert very cleverly has suggested in his reply.

I am getting rather tired of the phrase "Moderate Muslim". What does it mean to be moderate, and on what points is this "moderation" most required?

What the talking heads are really hoping to encourage from Muslims is a willingness to subject the tenets of the Koran to the evolving social norms of modern politically correct multicultural Western democracies. In other words, they want Muslims to adopt liberal theology and become liberal Muslims. The idea that something that is supposed to be Ultimate Truth can be rationally subordinated to outside standards is... interesting, to put it mildly.

Do you all remember what Hugh brought up in the original article about Akyol's support for jihad, his hysterical reaction to the Swiss minaret ban, in which he described Switzerland as a country full of "Aryan supremacists", and not full of Churchillian brave souls who don't want opensewerization/islamization shoved down their throats?

Well, it turns out that it is actually Akyol's fellow arabs pretending that they're not arabs in arab-occupied Constantinople who no longer make any secret of their love of Hitler. And that should come as no surprise to anyone, should it? After all, even the BBC reported that Hitler's quran is a bestseller in Akyol's native patch of Arabia, and I guess no one expecting trees and stones to tell them (as though they were high on crack cocaine) about Jews behind them can really hide their admiration and love of Hitler from the public eye forever, can they?

This, Mustafa Akyol, wants to be punished by regurgitating the flotilla incident. The MSM have accepted defeat by a resounding wave of public version (Isareli version) over the internet, to put it lightly.

I suggest, to Mustafa, to take his fake version of the event before we make any further mockery of his event

Hey mufaro akyol or whatever your weird name is, it's a blockade stupid. ANY country would stop a ship trying to break a blockade AND, "bloody raid"? Excuse me but it's ON FILM that the assholes on the ship started the bullshit, the IDF didn't start it. Typical mu-SLIME bullshit. Fuck off.

... I also don't accept that Israel has a right to put a blockade on the Gaza Strip ...

All the rest is the usual hair-splitting sophistry we have learned to expect from mohammedan intellectuals.

I do notice something, how shall I say, oddly clever and cold in his expression.

... I do define myself as a "liberal Muslim," for I uphold individual liberty, and criticize some elements within the Islamic tradition that contradict this value -- things such as the ban on apostasy, the bans on "sinful" things, or the enforcement of certain religious practices.

It's not just a ban, like the preacher scolds you or you lose your membership in the bowling league, THEY FREAKING KILL YOU!

And Mr. Akyol offers up for our admiration the fact that he "criticize[s]" such "elements within the Islamic tradition".

Well, as a free man I want you to know Mr. Alyol that I am damned impressed by your high handed attitude. As if you had some damn right to say who should live or die according to what they think.

So I feel that it is only fair that I return the favor and tell you that I am, at least temporarily, willing to tolerate our political leaders restraint in the matter of bombing you back into the 7th century where you belong. I am willing to discuss it as a provisional option.

I think that the question of whether or not you have the right to live should be evaluated in the light of liberal values.

One does have to maintain an open mind about such things.

I am, however, a bit skeptical.

Reading this, one completely understands why Muslims and their apologists are so loath to debate Robert. If this were a fencing joust, Mustafa Aykol would now be in shreds.

A previous piece on Mustafa Akyol and his reaction to the Swiss vote to ban minarets:

Mustafa Akyol Becomes Hysterical, Nazi-Invoking, Over The Swiss Vote

Mustafa Akyol is one of those self-styled "reformers" of Islam, helping to lull Westerners, and possibly himself too, with the dreamy idea that any day now, despite all the failed attempts over the past 1400 years, Islam can somehow be changed so that it will be able to co-exist with other faiths without dominating them, and forcing the adherents of those faiths into positions of permanent humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity. Akyol has had a good run among the softer minds in the West, who are always looking for signs of such Bright Young Muslim Reformers, never asking themselves how this "reform" is to be achieved or, even more important, how changes in the texts of Islam could possiby be accepted by the billion mostly very primitive people who believe in Islam.

Akyol likes to appropriate terms from Christianity. Thus, in describing his own project, of somehow convincing the world's Muslims to ignore the Hadith and Sira (and thus, presumably, to greatly diiminish the role of Muhammad -- an impossible task, but not for "reformer" Miustafa Akyol) -- and to stick on ly with the Qur'an, Mustafa Akyol calls this the wya of "sola scriptura," for all the world depicting himself as a Calvin or Zwingli on the Euxine Sea.

But when attacked, he becomes hysterically defensive -- about Islam, and about himself. You can find examples of how quickly he collapses, and the facade of sweet reason crumbles, by googling around. I think one or two of these exchanges may have been -- I can't remember -- with me.

And his reaction to the Swiss vote on minarets is instructive. LIke Dr. Zakir Naik, and so many other Muslims, he cannot understand why the minaret, a symbol of Muslim o'ertopping aggression, should be banned, why indeed any non-Muslims believe they have a right to interfere with, to contain or constrain, the symbols of Muslim aggression or, still worse, perhaps think they are justified in being alarmed about Islam and wish to constrain it, and its myrmidons, and bezonians, still further. He talks of "racism" when he knows perfectly well that Islam is an ideology, not a race, and his attempt to confuse the matter by talking about Turkish "racism" against Kurds as similar to the "racism" displayed against Muslims in Switzerland, when he should be talking about the position of non-Muslims, and churches, in the Musliim world. Mustafa Akyol avoids the obvioius, and he might, just might, be listened to with something other than complete disgust if, for example, he had chosen to demand, over these past years, that the Hagia Sophia be made a working church again, as the hint of a glint of a campaign to make Turkey open to Christianity, the historic faith that was well-established in Anatolia before Islam arrived, and to show other Muslims the way of "tolerance" that Mustafa Akyol shows himself concerned about only when it comes to o'erweening minarets in the Oberland.

His article cuts right to the chase: the rhetorical chase of the Third Reich. It is no longer the Swiss, you see, but "the Aryans" -- the Swiss as Nazis -- who banned the minaret. For only Nazis or their sympathizers could do such a thing, in the view, or the rhetoric, of Mustafa Akyol.

Take a look:

Aryan supremacy reigns supreme in Switzerland

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

MUSTAFA AKYOL

You must have heard that the open-minded people of Switzerland took to the polls last weekend to ban minarets – in a country where there are only four of them.

These days, the global news is full of stories and commentaries about this apparently democratic, yet shockingly illiberal decision. But if you really want to understand the undercurrents that led the majority of the Swiss society to this unbelievable point, I would suggest watching a 1940 film, “Der Ewige Jude.”

This was an anti-Semitic “documentary” produced by Fritz Hippler, who, under Joseph Goebbels, ran the film department in the Propaganda Ministry of the Third Reich. The 62-minute film, whose title means “The Eternal Jew,” was made to convince its German audience that Jews were dangerous creatures who, simply by their existence, threatened the civilized society of the Aryan peoples.

Aryan aesthetics

Aesthetics was at the basis of the “Der Ewige Jude” argument. The movie presented extended scenes about life in Polish ghettos, focusing on the long hair, beards, skull caps and caftans of Orthodox Jews. Contrasting these Eastern-looking people with the blond, blue-eyed and heavily muscled German athletes, the film argued that there is a fundamental gap of values between the two.

“The Nordic concept of beauty,” it said, “is completely incomprehensible to the Jew.” The latter, according to the script, were “dirty” people who enjoyed living in “bug-infested homes.”

To further emphasize the argument of incivility, the film also focused on the Jewish religious practice of kosher slaughtering, in which animals are bled to death. “Their so-called religion prevents the Jews from eating meat butchered in the ordinary way,” the narrator noted, remarking on how dreadfully different this was from the “well-known German love of animals.”

“Der Ewige Jude” was not speaking without “evidence.” It “proved” all its arguments with carefully selected facts. When it argued, for example, that Jews are compelled by their “so-called religion” to hate and conspire against non-Jews, the film quoted a few passages from the Jewish scriptures that indeed said harsh things about the gentiles.

Finally, the film focused on current events of the era. It told how Jews were multiplying rapidly among the Aryan peoples, polluting their clean living spaces. “They spread from Eastern Europe like an irresistible tide,” it warned, “flooding the towns and nations of Europe.”

That was the year 1940. And we all know what tragically happened in the next five years.

Now, if you want to understand why all this Nazi madness is relevant to today, you just need to replace the word “Jew” in the paragraphs above with the word “Muslim.” You will get a narrative very similar to that told by the nascent anti-Islamic movement in Europe, including the Swiss People’s Party, the main champion of the recent minaret ban.

Of course, this parallelism has its limits. First, I should note that I do not, by any means, foresee a “Muslim Holocaust” coming. Probably no European nation will ever go that insane again, at least in the foreseeable future. Moreover, there are differences between the sources of the anti-Judaism of the early 20th century and the anti-Islamism of today.

The Jews had become the focus of Nazi hatred simply because of the latter’s vicious ideology. In the current hatred against Muslims, though, one has to acknowledge the part played by the reaction to some of the nasty stuff done in the name of Islam: terrorism perpetrated or inspired by Al-Qaeda, violent protests against satirical cartoons, the repression of women in some Muslim communities, etc., etc.

Yet, still, one needs the contribution of racism and xenophobia to move on from these serious problems among Muslims to go against Islam as such, and against all of its believers. The overwhelming majority of Europe’s Muslims are in fact peaceful and law-abiding people who are just trying to make ends meet. Banning the very symbol of their place of worship means telling them: “Hey, in our eyes, you are all dangerous. Your mere existence here is our problem.”

Yet another Semitic people to hate

I know this mindless paranoia well, because we have a similar problem in Turkey with the Turkish racists. They despise the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, for its indeed despicable acts of terrorism. But then they channel their reaction toward all Kurds, not really looking at whether they really support the PKK or not, and moreover, not asking why those who support the PKK do so.

“The problem,” their motto reads, “is simply the Kurds themselves.”

Turkish racism is ugly, to be sure, but so is the Swiss one. The core problem in the latter belief, as I said, renders down to the old idea of Aryan supremacy – the idea that European Nordic people, and their “civilized” way of life, are inherently superior to those of the Eastern Semites, who are “polluting” it.

In other words, anti-Semitism, an aptly coined term, continues. In 1940, the hated Semites were the Orthodox Jews whose darker skins, strange food, “dirty” beards, skull caps and long caftans were enough to make them deplorable to the Nazis.

In 2009, apparently, the hated Semites are now the Orthodox Muslims, whose darker skins, strange food, “dirty” beards, skull caps, long caftans, and, as a novelty, headscarves and chadors, are the problem.

Just too bad to be true."

-----------------------------------------------------------My comment on Akyol's piece above:

Yes, of course. The Arabs like to say, idiotically, "we can't be antisemitic because we, you see, are 'Semites" too." And that ridiculous argument is now taken up by Mustafa Akyol. Now it is not only Arabs, but all Muslims, who are "Semites" -- that is, are Jews, are suffering as the Jews did. How true. Banning four minarets in Switzerland, that are symbols of Muslim power and aggression (and they are purely symbolic, they are not used, nor needed, for the Call to Prayer). is practically Auschwitz, Treblinka, Belzec.

That an "advanced" Muslim, one who has travelled and lived in the West, has received every benefit from the West -- didn't Daniel Pipes champion Akyol for a while, in his attempts to continue to reach out, work with, and no doubt help obtain financial support for collaborative projects with, "Muslim reformers"? -- one who grew up in the comparative mental freedom (because of Kemalism) of Turkey, should quickly become so hysterical, is telling.

I found another thing I wrote on Mustafa Akyol back in 2004, in which I wrote a little speech for him that I thought he might use. I don't know if he did, but the offer still stands:

Written on October 8, 2004:

On another thread, devoted to that young Turk and "reformer" (sola scriptura, dontcha know) of Islam, Mustafa Akyol, I pretended to be Akyol, writing what I thought he might write, in a ventriloquent posting inspired by the late (very late) Vattemare:

Let us be charitable. Let us help Mr. Akyol, a man who out of filial piety, and out of an inability to really stand back and see Islam for what it is (but what about all his pious and kind relatives? what about all those images of the awful and decadent West that dares to criticize this faith that has meant so much to so many? of course he can't do it, he simply can't, condemns himself to more apologetics).

So here goes. Mr. Akyol, feel free to use whatever you want in your "dialogue" with other "civilisations." (Note to reader: You are going to see a lot of that word "dialogue" in the next year or two -- you are going to have the "dialogue of civilisations" hither and yon -- anything to delay the day when unpleasant truths become unavoidable).

Mr. Akyol:

"Yes, it is true that there were mass killings of Armenians in the period 1894-1896 and from 1915 on. But please understand that these were not killings by "Turks" against "Armenians" but of those Muslims who had been whipped up by their beliefs against the "giavours" -- the "Christian" Armenians. Let us not forget that Christian Greeks, too, were the subject of murders on a large scale, and so were Christian Assyrians, from Turks, Kurds, and Arabs, all impelled by Muslim doctrine.

But that is precisely the point. That Turkey, that Islam, is exactly what we have, over the past 80 years, managed to contain. There are still Turks who believe, alas, in the same doctrines as those Turks, Kurds, and Arabs who engaged in wholesale massacres in 1915, and 1894, and in Damascus in 1860, and in another hundred or thousand or ten thousand times and places. But we are now the country that reveres Ataturk for having constrained Islam. Yes, of course we are worried about Erdogan. Of course, we -- the secular Turks, the Turks who wish to engage in real "dialogue" because we consider ourselves, if not completely men of the West, at least distinctly amphibian in our ability to move and live between the world of Islam and the western world.

There are some in the West who say we are only fooling ourselves. There are some who say that when we feel the slightest attack on Islam, we show our true colors, and immediately become defensive, apologetic, that we engage in taqiyya, that we ignore the true content of Qur'an and hadith and sira, that we ignore the long history of Muslim subjection of non-Muslims to a regime of humiliation and degradation

Yes, there are such people. But I am not among them, and there are others like me. We understand what Ataturk was trying to do. We have ourselves benefited from his reforms -- why do you think that a class of secular Turks has been created? Why do you think that when a Western tourist, or diplomat, engages a secularist Turk in conversation at a dinner party, he feels -- up to a point, of course -- that he is among people who are living on the same planet, with some of the same intellectual assumptions -- a feeling no honest tourist, and no honest diplomat, ever feels in a Muslim Arab country, or in those countries, such as Pakistan, that are in the Arab orbit.

Yes, it is wrong not to own up to the genocide of the Armenians. And it will continue to haunt us, and some of us realize that this question, and a good many others, must be answered successfully to relieve the fears of the European Community. A new, a real, understanding of the tenets of Islam is now dawning everywhere in the West. The old apologetics, the smiles, the diversionary tactics, the expressions of Muslim outrage feigned or real, can no longer withstand the pressure of events, nor the fact that even some Muslims are now beginning -- a Qatari here, a brave Egyptian there -- to identify that the explanation for the moral, intellectual, economic, and political failure of Muslim countries, lie with Islam itself.

Yes, if I have myself ever engaged in such logic-chopping, please understand how difficult it is, in a society, in a civilization, that defines itself, in which everyone defines himself, according to Islam, that nothing that is perceived as an attack on Islam can be allowed. Even the most advanced, humorful, kindly people, suddenly can change on a dime, if they think that Islam is being analyzed too closely, or that such questions as the matter of dhimmitude are being examined too intently. The temptation to deny, to present a pleasing facade, to engage in the "tu quoque" argument -- yes, this is, admittedly, what too many of us, even in Turkey, do.

As for me, having first tried the former, I began to read. I read Ibn Warraq. I went to his website, and that of Ali Sina. I found convincing much of the criticism of those people who, like me, were born into Islam, but who, unlike me, began to question, began to wonder, began to claim for themselves the same mental freedom, the same freedom of skeptical inquiry, that you in the West seem to possess by birthright -- a birthright, I know, that actually took centuries to develop and expand.

Please exercise some imaginative sympathy. Not everyone has the freedom, the mental freedom, to speak exactly what he thinks. I live in a Muslim country. I cannot discuss openly there the treatment of the Armenians. I cannot dare even to study the matter, but must repeat, as others do who know better, the Turkish government's line. There is now a law that requires me to deny the fact of the Armenian genocide.

Of course we want to enter the E.U. Of course we want the economic benefits, the freedom to move around for jobs -- and Turks will work at lower wages than others. Of course we want the $58 billion in estimated aid that we will receive from the E.U. Of course we want all this -- and if somehow this furthers the islamization of Europe, but eases our own situation -- well, why should we care? It is not our affair. If we are not allowed into the E.U., because the Europeans decide to consider only their own interests, then we may have to find common cause with the Arabs whom we despise. Why can't Europe keep our interests in mind?"

Well, that's the best I can do. Not very good, is it? But I tried. I tried

I do agree with part of what he says. We should go back to pre-1967 borders. As pre as we can get.....like the Bible!!! You know, before the pedophilia and murder fest of islam even existed!!

"In other words, they want Muslims to adopt liberal theology and become liberal Muslims."

It's not that they want Muslims to adopt liberal theology; it's that they already assume most Muslims have adopted liberal theology, or (in the Truman-Bush sense of "nation-building" democratization) are easily predisposed to do so, if only we spend billions to help them circumvent impediments caused by poverty.

Notice my little "or" that innocently obscures actually a monumental distinction, a distinction separated by a chasm over which the PC MC hang-glides effortlessly back and forth, heedless of the gulf between fantasy and reality, manipulating the Muslim masses in his mind in order to create a people we can get along with in this world, despite the increasingly disconcerting facts. For my "or" in my previous paragraph distinguishes two ways the Muslim masses are:

1) they (at least a sufficient majority of them) are already moderates (Bush's "moms and pops like the rest of us")

or

2) well, okay, a sufficient majority of them aren't moderate -- yet: but they will be as soon as we can help them with massive aid and occupying armies killing the Muslims among them who keep on exploding for some strange reason we can't fathom though we like to feel we have a handle on that little problem with the magic word "radicalization".

Little does the PC MC realize that they can't have it both ways. It's either #1 or #2, not somehow both through some insouciant vacillation back and forth. It is, of course, #2 that reflects the reality, the tip of the iceberg of Islam, the massive intractability of Muslims to modernization that cannot be explained away as only pertaining to a "tiny minority of extremists", nor when we allow ourselves to notice that it's much larger than a "tiny minority", as pertaining only to "poverty" or "culture" or "post-colonial hangovers", etc.

Here's a little article by Mustafa Akyol in which he dismisses all the concerns about the Fethullah Gulen movement as paranoid, and basically says Gulen and his movement are harmless.

http://www.fethullah-gulen.org/op-ed/mustafaakyol.html

Then we have this more glowing recommendation by Akyol, published on Fethullah Gulen's own website:

"The Gülen movement, to be sure, is notable for its achievements towards the cultivation of an Islamic perception that is in harmony with modern science, democracy and pluralism."

http://www.fethullahgulen.org/conference-papers/gulen-conference-in-washington-dc/3089-the-context-of-the-gulen-movement-the-exceptional-story-of-turkish-islam.html

Now here is what Gulen said in a couple of sermons one or both of which can be dated no earlier than 1994 (see link at bottom and scroll around for the Jihad Watch reader who helpfully provided argumentation for the dating):

"You must move in the arteries of the system, without anyone noticing your existence, until you reach all the power centers… until the conditions are ripe, they [the followers] must continue like this. If they do something prematurely, the world will crush our heads, and Muslims will suffer everywhere, like in the tragedies in Algeria, like in 1982 [in] Syria… like in the yearly disasters and tragedies in Egypt. The time is not yet right. You must wait for the time when you are complete, and conditions are ripe, until we can shoulder the entire world and carry it… You must wait until such time as you have gotten all the state power, until you have brought to your side all the power of the constitutional institutions in Turkey… Until that time, any step taken would be too early - like breaking an egg without waiting the full 40 days for it to hatch. It would be like killing the chick inside. The work to be done is [in] confronting the world. Now, I have expressed my feelings and thoughts to you all - in confidence… trusting your loyalty and sensitivity to secrecy. I know that when you leave here - [just] as you discard your empty juice boxes, you must discard the thoughts and feelings expressed here."

In yet another sermon, he said, "The philosophy of our service is that we open a house somewhere and, with the patience of a spider, we lay our web, to wait for people to get caught in the web; and we teach those who do. We don't lay the web to eat or consume them, but to show them the way to their resurrection, to blow life into their dead bodies and souls, to give them a life." [5]

References are here:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/01/islams-trojan-horse-turkish-nationalism-and-the-nakshibendi-sufi-order.html#comment-491257

P.S.:

Curiously, I found this result from Google:

"The White Path: The Protocols of The Learned Elders of Fethullah Gülen
This site may harm your computer.
1 post - 1 author - Last post: Mar 17
TheWhitePath.com provides writings of Mustafa Akyol on religion, politics, ... You might even hear that the 69-year-old Mr. Fethullah Gülen, ...
www.thewhitepath.com/.../the_protocols_of_the_learned_elders_of_fethullah_gulen.php
Get more discussion results

"The White Path: March 2010 Archives
This site may harm your computer.
11 posts - 3 authors - Last post: Mar 31
Posted by Mustafa Akyol at 3:03 PM | Comments (1) ... The Protocols of The Learned Elders of Fethullah Gülen ...
www.thewhitepath.com/archives/2010/03/"

Those warnings about harming your computer are provided by Google.

More on Fethullah Gulen:

In 1998, Gülen departed for the United States, reportedly to receive medical treatment for diabetes. However, his absence also enabled Gülen to escape questioning on his indictment in 2000 for allegedly promoting insurrection in Turkey in a series of secretly-recorded sermons. Since his voluntary exile, Gülen has resided on a large, rural estate in eastern Pennsylvania, together with about 100 followers, who guard him and tend to his needs. These servants are educated men who wear suits and ties and do not look like traditional Islamists in cloaks and turbans. They follow their hocaefendi's orders and even refrain from marrying until age fifty per his instructions. When they do marry, their spouses are expected to dress in the Islamic manner, as dictated by Gülen himself.[11] It is from his U.S. base that Gülen has built his fame and his transnational empire.
Gülen's Education Network

The core of Gülen's network is his educational institutions. His school network is impressive. Nurettin Veren, Gülen's right-hand man for thirty-five years, estimated that some 75 percent of Turkey's two million preparatory school students are enrolled in Gülen institutions.[12] He controls thousands of top-tier secondary schools, colleges, and student dormitories throughout Turkey, as well as private universities, the largest being Fatih University in Istanbul. Outside Turkey, his movement runs hundreds of secondary schools and dozens of universities in 110 countries worldwide. Gülen's aim is not altruistic: His followers target youth in the eighth through twelfth grades, mentor and indoctrinate them in the ışıkevi, educate them in the Fethullah schools, and prepare them for future careers in legal, political, and educational professions in order to create the ruling classes of the future Islamist, Turkish state. Taking their orders from Fethullah Gülen, wealthy followers continue to open schools and ışıkevi in what Sabah columnist Emre Aköz called "the education jihad."[13]

The overt network of schools is only one part of a larger strategy. In a 2006 interview, Veren said, "These schools are like shop windows. Recruitment and Islamization activities are carried out through night classes ... Children whom we educated in Turkey are now in the highest positions. There are governors, judges, military officers. There are ministers in the government. They consult Gülen before doing anything."[14]

The AKP's controversial education policies, coupled with the Islamist indoctrination in Fethullahist schools, have accelerated the Islamization of Turkish society. During AKP's first term in government, the Erdoğan government has changed textbooks, emphasized religion courses, and transferred thousands of certified imams from their positions in the Directorate of Religious Affairs to positions as teachers and administrators in Turkey's public schools.[15] Abdullah Gül, Turkey's first Islamist president and a Gülen sympathizer, appointed a Gülen-affiliated professor, Yusuf Ziya Özcan, to head Turkey's Council of Higher Education (Yükseköğretim Kurulu, YÖK). He has also used his presidential prerogative to appoint Gülen sympathizers to university presidencies.

Beyond Turkey, the Fethullahist schools also serve as fertile recruiting grounds. In his Institut d'Etudes Politiques doctoral thesis on Gülen schools in Central Asia, Bayram Balcı, a French scholar of Turkish origin, wrote, "Fethullah's aim is the Islamization of Turkish nationality and the Turcification of Islam in foreign countries. Dozens of Fethullah's ‘Turkish schools' abroad—most of which are for boys—are used to covertly ‘convert,' not so much ‘in school,' but through direct proselytism ‘outside school.'" Balcı explained, "He wants to revive the link between state, religion, and society."[16] The schools of Gülen's Nur movement in Central Asia have worked to reestablish Islam in a region largely secularized by decades of Soviet control. Balcı explained, "The aim of the cemaat is to educate and influence future national elites, who will speak English and Turkish and who will one day prove their good intentions towards Fethullahists and towards Turkey." Several countries in the region have taken steps against Gülen's educational institutions because of such suspicions. Uzbekistan has banned the schools for encouraging Islamic law,[17] and the Russian government, weary of the movement's activities in majority Muslim regions of the federation, has banned not only the Gülen schools but all activities of the entire Nur sect in the country.[18]

Neither Uzbekistan nor Russia are known for their pluralism, but suspicion about Gülen indoctrination has spread even to more permissive societies such as that of the Netherlands. In 2008, members of the Netherland's Christian Democrat, Labor, and Conservative parties agreed to cut several million euros in government funding for organizations affiliated with "the Turkish imam Fethullah Gülen" and to thoroughly investigate the activities of the Gülen group after Erik Jan Zürcher, director of the Amsterdam-based International Institute for Social History, and five former Gülen followers who had worked in Gülen's ışıkevi told Dutch television that the Gülen community was moving step-by-step to topple the secular order.[19] While the organizations in question denied any ties to the Gülen movement, Zürcher said that taqiya, religiously-sanctioned dissimulation, was typical in the movement's interactions with the West. An unnamed former Gülen follower who also once worked in Gülen schools and ışıkevi reported that Fethullahists called the Dutch "filthy, blasphemous infidels" and that they said "the best Dutchman is one who has converted to Islam. All the Dutch must be made Muslims."[20] Indeed, of the thousands of Fethullahist schools in more than one hundred countries that allegedly teach moderation, none are located in countries such as Saudi Arabia or Iran that exist under domineering strains of official Islam, and most appear instead geared to radicalize students in secular Muslim and non-Muslim societies.

http://www.meforum.org/2045/fethullah-gulens-grand-ambition

LOL @ Zionist Joe (Biden)

What is interesting is that these porkis say "Dont Kill Innocent folks" but they dont define Innocent...for them if you are a porki then you are Innocent otherwise you are not...

Dear Mustafa,

Get rid of Hamas and Hezbollah in the West Bank and your problems will be solved, well almost solved. You would probably have to get rid of Fatah, the al Aqsa Brigade, PLO, and al Kassam Brigade. Hamas and Hezbollah would be a good start because they are the main reason most Palestinian people aren't getting the necessary food and supplies they need.

Pehaps with a little effort, and public relations you could change world opinion of these terrorist organizations and perhaps they will fade away.

I suppose that would be asking too much however.

As to the flotilla...that's an easy one. All you have to do is look at the videos.

There cannot be an independent UN investigation unless these investigations are carried out by non-Muslim, non-Jewish and non-leftist organizations. A certifiably non-biased group from Canada and one from Switzerland would be a good option because you can be assured that it would be honest and thorough.

That is the stated goal of the Hamas movement that runs the Gaza strip that was to be the recipient of this “humanitarian aid.”

And it is the goal as well of the Slow Jihadists of Fatah, that is of the corrupt warlords, the henchmen of Arafat, who now run the "Palestinian Authority" that exists only because of American aid and Israeli assurances that they will prevent Hamas from overthrowing the local rule of Fatah, for without the IDF ultimately controlling things Mahmoud Abbas would have no power beyond his building in Ramallah.

Wow. That's a weak response.

A couple of factual corrections. With regards to Camp David I've taken the trouble to compile the facts which belie Spencer's false assertions. Go here:

http://bigwhiteogre.blogspot.com/2010/06/arafat-waled-away-from-sweetheart-deal.html

It is "established" that the peace activists attacked first? Based upon the limited video that Israel released, which doesn't show what happened prior to the landing? The activists say Israel fired live ammunition before boarding. I don't pretend to know the truth between these conflicting claims. The fact that Spencer rushes to judgment before the evidence is made available is proof that he's committed to the Israeli narrative regardless of the facts.

But shouldn't he ask himself why Israel confiscated all photographic and video equipment and evidence from the passengers on the ships? Doesn't that strike Robert as odd? Why would they do that if not to prevent incriminating video from emerging? This is the same Israeli government that repeatedly asserted they were not bombing Gazans with white phosphorous. Perhaps they thought that since they had blocked journalistic access nobody would be the wiser. But the photos are widespread now and Israel has admitted that it did use white phosphorous. Would a rational person take Israel's word now with regards to the flotilla incident when they won't let us see the photos and video?

We have an armed commando raid in the dead of night. We have passengers that had to improvise and fight with whatever sticks or other solid objects they had available, apparently because they had no weapons. Yet we're to treat the Israeli commandos that killed 9 people as the victims here. If that's not chutzpah what is?

True Muhammad Muslim are very
good at telling lies about bad
things of other people.....but
very bad at telling the truth
about themselves....

"MODERATE MUSLIM" there is no.....
"AMBIGUOUS MUSLIM"....there is....

Your response to Akyol features ahistorical analysis that betrays your supposed academic bonafides, far be it for the morons on this web site to pick up on that though.