Doğrulama MerkeziAlgı büyütülebilir ama gerçek değişmez
Follow
XYouTube
Home

conference ban

11 entries

A record of conferences blocked by governor's office decisions and security grounds; how the stated ground changed is here too.

What is Kuytul's finding about a "secret committee hostile to religion"?

The interview after 22 April 2017: how he describes the structure he sees behind the obstructions, and why he does not lay what happened at the government's door alone.

The claim that "they are being obstructed because they are enemies of the government"

The thesis presented as the reason for the obstructions does not match the record: he supported the same government's resolution process and welcomed its headscarf regulation.

Unfounded

The claim that "Furkan Foundation's programs pose a security risk"

The justification for the bans was always security. Yet in hundreds of conferences not a single pane of glass was broken, the permitted rally of 29 May 2016 ended without incident, and on 22 April 2017 not a single stone was thrown.

Unfounded

The "He Used the Prophet for His Own Benefit" Claim

Of the twenty-minute statement made on 10 April 2016 in front of the conference whose hall had been cancelled two days beforehand, only the dream passage was clipped out; the cancellation itself was never discussed.

Out of context

The "They Act According to Dreams" Claim

The one who says that a dream is not acted upon is Kuytul himself: what was related on 10 April 2016 was not a ruling but glad tidings given to a tense crowd.

Unfounded

The "He Compared Turkey to East Turkestan" Claim

The comparison really was made; what was dropped in the retelling was its grounds, which rested not on a single tarawih ban but on a list of incidents running from 2014 to 2020.

Out of context

The claim that "there was a state of emergency, and they tried to hold an event despite the ban"

The governor's office did have a ban decision; but that decision concerned the conference. The press statement was on a different subject, statements in Adana did not require permission, and the park chosen was not on the list of banned places.

Partly true

Did the ban decision of the Adana Governor's Office target a hall or a religious community?

The subject of the decision was not a hall but a foundation and the persons deemed connected to it; its area was the whole province and it had no end date. In the field, too, it was applied broadly, not narrowly.

Distorted

When did the conference obstructions begin? A 2014-2018 timeline

The obstructions did not begin with the operation of 30 January 2018: the first statement was published on 13 December 2014, and then came İskenderun in 2016 and Adana in 2017.

The claim that "the Furkan Foundation blocked the motorway"

The motorway really was closed. But the closure was the result of the roads being held in advance and of vehicles not being allowed out; as soon as permission for the square came through the road was opened, and the statement ended without incident.

Out of context

Was the İskenderun conference really cancelled on "security" grounds?

Permission for the conference was granted on 11 May 2016, and it was then cancelled on security grounds. In the same period the posters were confiscated and sponsors were pressured; on the same day an open-air program of tens of thousands ended without incident.

Distorted

Follow us

Be the first to see new fact-checks as they are published.

XYouTube