Last week Turkey’s Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan announced that Turkey would officially request the extradition of US-based Mullah Fethullah Gulen- a Turkish preacher in Pennsylvania with a $20+ billion network, whose followers have been accused of trying to eliminate PM Erdogan’s government.
The New York Times began parading various agenda-driven analysts and experts, showcasing Gulen-connected figures, and attacking Turkey’s Erdogan in a one-sided lobbying effort. Before I go any further, allow me to illustrate the New York Times’ vehement, bold and one-sided defense of Gulen with verbatim quotes [All Emphasis Mine]:
Mr. Erdogan’s Islamist government and the supporters of Gulen, who promotes a moderate, pro-Western brand of Sunni Islam that appeals to many well-educatedand professional Turks.
I know our regular readers and supporters here at Boiling Frogs Post don’t need the bold emphases to explain the propaganda with its carefully picked words. For those who are not familiar with our extensive coverage of Mullah Gulen (See here, here, here, here and here), take notice of how Erdogan’s government is being characterized with one word, Erdogan’s Islamist government- a word often used and highlighted by Western propaganda outlets, aka mainstream media, with negative connotations and in close association with global terrorism. Now, please pay attention to all the false positive adjectives and characterization used by NYT to present Mullah Fethullah Gulen: Moderate, Pro-Western, Well-Educated, Professional. Oh, golly- Who is the Mullah here?!
You see, this is such a classic with the US government-fed propaganda outlets, aka US mainstream media. They first set the tone based on the objectives handed to them by their bosses. In this case: The CIA and the State Department. The readers, the uninformed readers, are pointed towards the intended false direction: An Islamist Government versus a moderate pro-Western man with well-educated and professional followers.
Let’s continue [All Emphasis Mine]:
“This extradition request has no legal basis,” said Ergun Ozbudun, a professor of law at Istanbul Sehir University, noting the considerable difficulty surrounding extradition requests even when suspects are charged with serious crimes. “The request for Fethullah Gulen’s extradition therefore would be a political one, and I don’t think would produce any results.”
Lawyers for Mr. Gulen, who has permanent resident status in the United States, agreed. “There is neither an investigation nor an arrest warrant issued by court in place to submit to the U.S. authorities,” said Nurullah Albayrak, an Istanbul lawyer who represents Mr. Gulen. “This is not something that political will can decide.”
A Gulen-affiliated group in New York, the Alliance for Shared Values, on Tuesday denounced Mr. Erdogan’s move, saying, “The prime minister’s talk about demanding the extradition of Mr. Gulen, when there are no charges or legal case against him, is a clear indication of political persecution and harassment.”
NYT picks one pro-Gulen legal expert, one lawyer who represents Mullah Gulen, and Gulen’s own organization, and establishes the extradition request as political with no legal basis. Now, let me go over this article for the fifth time, and see whether NYT showcases any so-called legal experts from the other side- one that puts forth the legal basis for this extradition request. I’m looking, looking, looking, and ooops: I have reached the end of the lobby-propaganda piece, and there is not a single legal opinion or analysis from the other side! How amazing is that?!
Finally, after showcasing Mullah Gulen’s confident denial of all documented accusations against him, without showcasing a single analyst or legal expert for the other side, the New York Times concludes its propaganda-lobby piece with the following paragraph:
In general, for the United States to approve an extradition request from another country, the person must be accused of a crime recognized in both jurisdictions, and there must be a reasonable belief that the person did commit the crime. It was not clear whether Turkey’s request would satisfy either requirement.
Now that we have established this editorial by the New York Times clearly as a one-sided lobby and propaganda piece for Mullah Gulen, ask yourself the following questions: Why did the New York Times jump to defend the Gülen Movement and the controversial Mullah? Whose interests is the New York Times really representing here? Why?
You see, this propaganda-lobby piece follows another equally propaganda-lobby piece that was published by the Washington Post a few months back:
In January this year, The Washington Post dutifully provided a platform for three outspoken Israel Lobbyists who are jointly calling on the Obama Administration to overthrow the current Turkish Administration. You heard it right. Morton Abramowitz, Eric Edelman and Blaise Misztal jointly penned a hysteria-reeked article to declare Turkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan a despot, and a great threat to democracy and U.S. interests. Let’s provide a few excerpts from this propaganda-ridden article :
Whatever his achievements over the past decade, Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is destroying his country’s parlous democracy. That is a profound problem for Turks and Turkey’s Western allies. Staying silent, out of fear that speaking out would harm some short-term interests, risks Turkey’s longer-term stability.
Turkey’s democratic decline creates a pressing dilemma for the United States. Erdogan’s current course would take Turkey from an imperfect democracy to an autocracy. Such a fate for a close ally and NATO member would have profound implications for our partnership, the United States’ beleaguered credibility and the prospects for democracy in the region.
U.S. policymakers should lay aside their reluctance to confront the disastrous impact of Erdogan’s dictatorial tendencies and remind the Turkish leader of the importance the United States attaches to Turkey’s political stability and democratic vitality. Particularly as their influence is greater than it appears…
Erdogan is doing great harm to Turkey’s democracy. The United States should make clear, privately and publicly, that his extreme actions and demagoguery are subverting Turkey’s political institutions and values and endangering the U.S.-Turkey relationship.
Mort Abramowitz is a known neocon, Israel lobbyist, CIA and State Department Operative, and PNAC signatory, and has been one of Fethullah Gulen’s main handlers and backers. In fact, when the FBI and Homeland Security Department tried to kick the Islamic Mullah out of the United States, Abramowitz was one of the first Gulen CIA-State Department handlers to step in.
As for Eric Edelman? Let’s go back nine years and check him out in my State Secrets Gallery: I presented the State Department-CIA’s Eric Edelman as one of the top culprits in my State Secrets Privilege Case - when the government invoked the State Secrets Privilege and several additional gag orders to cover up the FBI’s investigations and files pertaining to CIA-NATO terror operations in Central Asia & the Caucasus since the mid-1990s. Just like Abramowitz, Edelman is known as an avid Israel lobbyist and a neocon.
If you haven’t already, please refer to my article and interview where I discuss and emphasize the role of Turkish Mullah Fethullah Gulen, who has been residing in the United States since 1998, as a major operative for CIA-NATO operations, not only in Turkey, but also in Central Asia and the Caucasus. During the past few years I have been a lone voice in the United States when it comes to real coverage of Gulen and his operations under the CIA. Here are a few examples of my coverage since 2009:
As a persistent lone voice I am asking you to pay close attention to these historical facts, the documented incestuous connections including the CIA, State Department and the Israel Lobby, and then go back and read this same New York Times article again. Then, you will be able to answer very quickly and confidently when you are asked: Whose interests is the New York Times serving? Who rules and controls the propaganda channels called US mainstream media outlets?
This is why I always question, and almost always write off, whistleblower cases that become the darling adopted pet cases for publications like the New York Times and Washington Post. You see, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t establish the rulers and ownership and agenda –setters for these publications, aka US media, and then go back and trust them when they begin to sell you a whistleblower or a leak as the real deal. It just doesn’t happen. One thing you can count on when it comes to this puppetry is consistency. If they advocate and report something it has been declared allowable and kosher by their bosses. And as we all know: nothing good or noble exists on the agenda list of the ruling establishment.
Sibel Edmonds is the Publisher & Editor of Boiling Frogs Post and the author of the Memoir Classified Woman: The Sibel Edmonds Story. She is the recipient of the 2006 PEN Newman's Own First Amendment Award for her “commitment to preserving the free flow of information in the United States in a time of growing international isolation and increasing government secrecy” Ms. Edmonds has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University.