The groundlessness of the claims regarding Ebru Simsek

Several court rulings definitively established that Ebru Simsek’s allegations against Mr. Adnan Oktar and the SRF circle were all slanders. But New Humanist magazine never mentioned the rulings in question, presenting all of Ebru Simsek’s claims as if they were true fact. This is an example of a most familiar psychological warfare method conducted by masons, atheists and Darwinists. 
Judicial rulings showing that all of Ebru Simsek’s claims are slanders:

1. The Chief Prosecutor’s Office’s considered acquittal opinion showing that Ebru Simsek’s allegations in Case No. 2006/26, an extension of the SRF case, were slanders and the VERDICT OF ACQUITTAL No. 2007/7 dated 22.01.2007 by the Istanbul 2nd High Criminal Court.
2. The Istanbul Chief Prosecutor’s Office’s VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION of Ebru Simsek's fantastical claims (in 1999) under ruling No. 96/9848 Hz – 99/8409 K. dated 12.08.1999. 
3. The Istanbul Chief Prosecutor’s Office’s VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION No. 05/27549 Hz. - 05/12003 K. dated 18.10.2005.
4. The Istanbul Public Prosecutor’s Office’s verdict of non-prosecution No. 02/60013 Hz. - 02/18838 K. dated 31.12.2002 and the Beyoglu 3rd High Criminal Court’s VERDICT OF REFUSAL OF OBJECTION No. 03/458 Mut. dated 28.04.2003 regarding the refusal of objection against the former.
5. The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office’s verdict of non-prosecution No. 02/39606 Hz. - 03/8860 K. dated 30.06.2003 and the Beyoglu 2nd High Criminal Court’s VERDICT OF REFUSAL OF OBJECTION No. 03/333 Mut. dated 03.10.2003 regarding the refusal of objection against the former.
6. The Bagcilar Public Prosecutor’s Office’s verdict of non-prosecution No. 02/21669 Hz. - 03/6120 K. dated 15.10.2003 and the Eyup 2nd High Criminal Court’s VERDICT OF REFUSAL OF OBJECTION No. 03/894 D.Is. dated 02.01.2004 regarding the refusal of objection against the former.
7. The Uskudar Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office’s verdict of non-prosecution No. 04/7693 Hz. - 04/4749 K. dated 01.07.2004 and the Kadikoy 2nd High Criminal Court’s VERDICT OF REFUSAL OF OBJECTION No. 04/437 Mut. dated 09.09.2004 regarding the refusal of objection against the former.
8. The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office’s VERDICT OF REFUSAL OF OBJECTION No. 05/51724 Hz. – 06/2432 K. dated 27.03.2006.
9. The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office’s VERDICT OF REFUSAL OF OBJECTION No. 05/51725 Hz.
10. Following the known images of Ebru Simsek in the press, an Istanbul University Medical School Department of Forensic Medicine expert carried out an inquiry in which IT WAS ESTABLISHED UNDER REPORT No. 2005/127765 dated 21.10.2005 that Ebru Simsek’s claims were merely slanders.
11. Istanbul 2nd High Criminal Court had the home in the allegations of Ebru Simsek and the home in the images examined by an official expert, accompanied by the court judges. This expert report revealed that THE HOME IN THE IMAGES DEFINITELY DID NOT BELONG TO THE SRF MEMBER.
12. Filiz Karatas, who shared a house with Ebru Simsek at the time she began issuing slanders against the SRF members, gave a witness statement to the court in Istanbul 2nd High Criminal Court file No. 04/337 E. on 09.12.2004 and said that the SRF members were uninvolved in the matter and THAT THEY HAD ISSUED THIS IMAGINARY ALLEGATION TOGETHER TO SLANDER THE SRF.
13. Ten separate criminal complaints brought by those slandered by Ebru Simsek were examined by 10 different Public Prosecutors from different offices; these prosecutors concluded, as a result of their investigations, that Ebru Simsek’s claims were slanderous.

The groundless nature of the claims regarding Fatih Altayli

The courts have determined that the accusation by Fatih Altayli, whose name appears as a plaintiff in the SRF case, about “defamatory writings about him being sent to certain press organizations” are unfounded. This imputation by Fatih Altayli had previously been taken to court several times before, and it was determined, through an acquittal ruling, that this claim had nothing to do with the SRF defendants.
The Kartal 2nd Court of First Instance that heard the case in the light of Fatih Altayli’s complaint concerning the SRF administrators established that the writings in question had nothing to do with the SRF and issued an ACQUITTAL RULING, No. 1996/381 E. 1998/508 K dated 12.06.1998, regarding the foundation managers. The ruling has also been confirmed by the 4th Chamber of Supreme Court of Appeals.  
Fatih Altayli also sued the SRF managers and members for libel at the Istanbul 6th Court of First Instance.  That court received reports from a 3-member team of experts regarding the bulletins in question. The team of experts whose opinions were canvassed by the court determined, as a result of their inquiries, that these writings were completely unconnected to the SRF community. In the expert witness report, dated 28.01.2002 and given to the Istanbul 6th Court of First Instance by Prof. Dr. Kemal Yavuz, Prof. Dr. Mustafa Ozkan and Asst. Prof. Dr. Fatih Andi, Fatih Altayli’s claims were explicitly described as groundless.

In addition to all this, contrary to what is maintained on the State Security Court (DGM) Considered Legal Opinion, Fatih Altayli told the Istanbul No. 1 DGM that members of the SRF community made no threats against him and there was no question of any material gain. In answer to questions on the subject from the president of the Istanbul No. 1 DGM, Fatih Altayli replied THERE WAS NO THREAT OR FINANCIAL INTEREST, AND I WAS SUBJECTED TO NO THREATS.” Anyone interested in examining the relevant evidence should visit this address.
Therefore, all the claims in New Humanist about Fatih Altayli are entirely based on false allegations. The claims in question are claims that have been definitively invalidated by judicial rulings. But as in all atheist, Darwinist and materialist publications, no mention was made of the fact that the SRF circle was acquitted of all these allegations, while these claims, solely of the nature of false allegations, were simply reiterated.

The Baselessness of the claims against Mr. Adnan Oktar and SRF circle suggesting “alleged different religious practices.”

New Humanist magazine expressed some of the baseless claims of some masonic, Darwinist and materialist centers together with their biased comments and brought forward the claim that Mr. Adnan Oktar allegedly engaged in different religious practices. However this unreal claim, which is totally based on speculations, is nothing beyond a slander made by some masonic centers to attain their insidious goals. Indeed this claim is refuted by countless evidences. 
Mr. Oktar’s works and interviews expounding the Ahl Al-Sunnah creed, the obligatory nature and merits of the salat 5 times a day are closely followed worldwide. Furthermore these are included in Adnan Oktar’s books that have been published since 1990s. Consequently there exists no evidence and witness to bring such a claim against Adnan Oktar.
When Adnan Oktar’s works are examined, his views regarding to adherence to Ahl Al-Sunnah in performance of salat are explicitly seen. In the book, Quick Grasp of Faith- 1, p.63 and 64, the author expounds that salat is five times a day and it is made up of a total of 40 rakat including its obligatory, essential and sunnah rakats. In the book, Basic Tenets of Islam, p. 81-83, it is again explicitly related that salat is 5 times a day and is made up of 40 rakats. In another book of the author, Perfected Faith, p. 24-25, he explains that salat is performed 5 times a day.
Our valuable Theology professors also submitted their scientific opinions stating that the author’s religious understanding is in line with the Hanafi school and in compliance with Ahl Al-Sunnah. Prof. MEHMET BAYRAKDAR, one of these valuable professors from Ankara University Theology Faculty, states the following in his scientific opinion: 

“ IN NONE OF THE WORKS OF THE AUTHOR THERE EXISTS ANY VIEWS CONTRARY TO THE QUR’AN AND SUNNAH, THE FUNDEMENTAL SOURCES OF ISLAM. On the contrary, our traditional Turkish-Islamic understanding is preserved. Any information contrary to our national and religious customs does not exist...”

Below are the scientific opinions of the valuable theology professors proving the baselessness of the claims suggesting that the author “allegedly engaged in different religious practices”:

1-    Prof. Dr. Salih Akdemir’s (Ankara University Qur’anic Commentary Department Academic Member) 20.03.2000 dated opinion
2-    Prof. Dr. Mevlüt Güngör’s (Ankara University Qur’anic Commentary Department Chairman) 25.03.2000 dated opinion
3-    Prof. Dr. Hayrettin Karaman’s (European International Islam University Academic Member) opinion
4-    Prof. Dr. M. Saim Yeprem’s (Marmara University Theology Faculty Dean) 20.10.2000 dated opinion
5-    Prof. Dr. M. Hayri Kırbaşoğlu’s (Ankara University Hadith Department Acadamic Member) 28.03.2000 dated opinion
6-    Prof. Dr. Mehmet Bayrakdar’s (Ankara University Theology Faculty Academic Member) 30.05.2000 dated opinion
7-    Assistant Professor Dr. İlhami Güler’s (Ankara University Islamic Philosophy Department Academic Member) 25.03.2000 dated opinion
8-    Assistant Professor Ömer Özsoy’s (Ankara University Commentary Department Academic Member) 29.02.2000 dated opinion
9-    Associate Professor Mehmet Paçacı’s (Ankara University Theology Faculty Islamic Sciences Academic Member) 01.06.2000 dated opinion

You can read Mr. Oktar’s precious views regarding Ahl-Al Sunnah here. You can again read Mr. Adnan Oktar’s book about the merits of prayer 5 times a day here.

The 19-Month Period of Imprisonment and Detention in a Mental Hospital Is the Result of the First Smear Campaign Intended to Halt Mr. Adnan Oktar's Activities

In the summer of 1986, Mr. Oktar was arrested, with no rightful legal ground whatsoever, for having stated, "I am a member of the Turkish People, and of the Nation of Abraham," in an interview carried by a newspaper. Again under the influence of the circles mentioned above, deceitful reports, groundless information and slanders about him began appearing in various publications of Darwinist origin.

Mr. Oktar was first arrested and imprisoned. He was confined in a one-man cell for nine months. He was then chained by the foot to a bed in the Forensic Medicine Department for 40 days. He was then transferred to the Bakirkoy Mental Hospital on the grounds of being mentally unhealthy and placed under observation in ward 14A, poorly maintained, filthy, and used to house the most dangerous inmates. Ward 14A, which housed 300 mental patients, was in a stone building left over from the reign of Sultan Abdul Hamid and could be entered only by passing through a number of locked iron doors, since killings among patients were viewed as nothing out of the ordinary. During Mr. Oktar's time there, seven murders were committed. In addition, he was forcibly given drugs blurring consciousness. Those who managed to visit him witnessed that he had lost none of his determination and enthusiasm at this time. Postgraduate students, nurses and even doctors were prohibited from seeing him, out of concerns that he would turn them to Islamic moral values. Shortly afterwards, his relatives and friends were also banned from visiting him, and even telephone calls were forbidden. He was threatened with spending the rest of his life in the hospital unless he abandoned his intellectual activities. Intense pressure began to be applied by certain circles in order for him to put an end to his activities against Darwinism and freemasonry and to abandon his books. Proposals to the effect that if he put an end to them he could immediately be released from hospital and spend the rest of his life in comfort. But he rejected all these offers, refusing to bow to the threats and pressure that only enhanced his determination.
After Mr. Oktar had been detained for 19 months, the Prosecutor's Office determined there was "no offence in the statements uttered." He was declared innocent and released.
The report issued by the Gulhane Military Medical Academy (GATA) confirming Mr.  Oktar's SANITY, however, was never once mentioned by the press exclusively owned by Darwinists. After being depicted as mentally ill for 20 years, a Military Hospital report confirmed that he was completely sane.

Baseless Slanders against Mr.Adnan Oktar

Baselessness of libels having sexual content against Mr. Adnan Oktar and his friends

New Humanist, an atheist and Darwinist magazine, amazingly cites some disproved claims against Mr. Adnan Oktar and thus becomes a part of an anti-propaganda. The line of the magazine in question, which is an atheist and Darwinist publication, clearly reveals its biased attitudes in its claims against Mr. Adnan Oktar. Like all atheist, Darwinist publications, this magazine also appears to be severely annoyed by the strong anti-Darwinist activities.
Libels with sexual content against Adnan Oktar and Science Research Foundation (SRF) have always been an important indicator of the unease felt by Darwinists. Whenever atheist and Darwinist parties sense their defeat, they lose no time resorting to libels having sexual content, which is the most delicate subject of the society. Consequently it is not surprising that such claims were revealed in New Humanist magazine. For the claim in question to be accepted, there should primarily be a complainant, an aggrieved party and a witness. Yet, for the claim in question to be accepted as true, there exists not a single witness, complainant or an aggrieved party. Furthermore, it is legally proven that the claim of hidden cameras referred to in New Humanist has no validity whatsoever. The verdicts of acquittal and dismissal of proceedings given by the Courts and public prosecutors totally disprove this claim. Indeed there exists not a single video camera or a recording that would verify this claim.
Tugce Doras and Seckin Piriler, two people New Humanist tries to show as witnesses, are the people who had to sign the testimonies put in front of them under duress in the police station. These people then stated that they were subjected to pressure in the police station and thus refused to accept their testimonies in police station. Furthermore, they declared before the judge that they do not accept their testimonies since they were subjected to pressure in the police station. They further added that they had not been oppressed or harmed either by Adnan Oktar or anyone from this community, and that there exists not an interest with sexual-content as claimed in question. The statements in question are available in court minutes. You can reach related detailed information and documents from here.
The claims stated here are based on the testimonies signed under duress and torture by all SRF members tried and taken under custody as a result of the plots hatched by the alleged Ergenekon terror organization in 1999. According to the law, police testimonies signed under torture and in the absence of advocates are utterly invalid. However, based on the invalid testimonies taken by police, the Court imposed a penalty on the SRF case. These testimonies illegally considered by the Court as a basis for the verdict, the very same explanations, are repeated in the New Humanist and presented to the readers as if they have any actuality.

The Groundless Nature of the Claims on Wikipedia Regarding Mr. Adnan Oktar's Views Concerning Zionism and the Jews

The behavior advised to all Muslims in the Qur'an involves treating the People of the Book with love, respect, affection and compassion, protecting and watching over them and meeting their needs in the finest manner. As a Muslim who sincerely abides by the Qur'an, Mr. Oktar feels the love toward Christians and Jews that is commanded in the Qur'an, watches over and protects them, wants them to live by their faiths in peace and security and strives for that end. Indeed, he frequently expresses this in his writings and interviews. This can clearly be seen from the way that the Sanhedrin rabbis and Israeli government officials he recently hosted described the feelings of friendship and closeness they received from Mr. Oktar.
You can access all the articles and interviews on this subject from the web site.
You can watch Mr. Oktar's meetings with Sanhedrin rabbis and other Israeli officials here, here and here.
The logic and intellectual system that Mr. Oktar has been criticizing for years is that of the atheist Zionists. It is of course unthinkable to ascribe this mindset to truly devout Jews.
There are two varieties of Zionism today. The first of these is the Zionist conception of the devout Jewish people, who wish to live in peace and security in Israel alongside Muslims, seeking peace and wishing to worship in the lands of their forefathers and engage in business. In that sense, Muslims support Zionism. We would fully back the devout Jewish people living in peace and security in their own lands, remembering Allah, worshipping in their synagogues and engaging in science and trade in their own land.
The Zionist belief held by a devout Jew and based on the Torah does not in any way conflict with the Qur'an. The Jews' living in that region is indicated in the Qur'an, in which it is revealed that Allah has settled the Children of Israel on it:

Remember when Moses said to his people, "My people! Remember Allah's blessing to you when He appointed prophets among you and appointed kings for you, and gave you what He had not given to anyone else in all the worlds! My people! Enter the Holy Land which Allah has ordained for you. Do not turn back in your tracks and so become transformed into losers." (Surat al-Ma'ida: 20-21)

It is the "irreligious, Godless Zionism" that we as Muslims condemn and regard as a threat. These Godless Zionists, who do not defend the existence and oneness of Allah, but, on the contrary, encourage a Darwinist, materialist perspective and thus engage in irreligious propaganda, are also a threat to devout Jews. Godless Zionism is today engaged in a struggle against peace, security and moral virtue, and constantly produces strife and turmoil and the shedding of blood.
One of the hundreds of statements by Mr. Oktar regarding the need to watch over and protect devout Jews reads:
ADNAN OKTAR: We should earnestly take care of devout Jews in Israel, just like we watch over Palestine most efficaciously. They are entirely ours, some of them are children of the Prophet Jacob (pbuh), and others are children of the Prophet Ishmael (pbuh). Some of them are descendants of the Prophet Jacob (pbuh), some are descendants of the Prophet Ishmael (pbuh). They are the lineage of the prophets. The entire nation and breed comes from the prophets and they are very devout and pure people. There are atheist Zionists and masons who are troubling them. There is a group that aims to break them and make them destroy one another. We need to pull them aside, to withdraw this evil clan and let our devout and pure brothers of prophet lineage live in happiness there. One-sided politics is wrong, that would not conform to justice or conscience. It would not be reasonable as well. And we cannot ignore such glory because Jews are very devout and dignified people. We must definitely protect and safeguard them, but at the same time we must free the Palestinians from these troubles as our brothers.
Mr. Oktar said the following in one of his recent statements:
ADNAN OKTAR: The pronouncement of the Qur'an regarding the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] is crystal clear, and is also clear from the Sunnah of our Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). The people of the Book are our La Ilaha IllaAllah (there is no deity but Allah) brothers; Armenians, Jews, the Orthodox, Protestants and the whole Christian world are all our brothers. We all believe in the same Allah. There is the same belief in the Christian, Jewish and Islamic worlds. We are all the children of the Prophet Abraham (pbuh). Members of all three faiths share the same basic beliefs, and the existence of the People of the Book is therefore a great blessing. Islam is not solely based on the peace and comfort of Muslims. The Qur'an says that the People of the Book also exist. And according to the Qur'an, the People of the Book must also live in peace and comfort and be protected by Muslims. It is an excellent thing to live as brothers and talk and converse with the People of the Book. According to the Qur'an, one may marry members of the People of the Book, eat their food and enjoy business and social relationships with them. Islam demands that the People of the Book be shown affection and respect. This is a religious obligation for Muslims. Allah says in one verse:
Today all good things have been made lawful for you. And the food of those given the Book is also lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. So are chaste women from among the believers and chaste women of those given the Book before you, once you have given them their dowries in marriage, not in fornication or taking them as secret intrigues. But as for anyone who rejects faith, his actions will come to nothing and in the Hereafter he will be among the losers. (Surat al-Ma'ida, 5)
You can access our article on the subject from here.
You can read the verses of the Qur'an regarding treating the People of the Book with love and affection here.