Ebru Simsek is the Only Person to Slander with Sexual Allegations, but All Her Claims Were Nullified with the Acquittal Rulings Issued by the Courts

People who set out on the path of Allah, who act for His good pleasure, who attract the opposition of Darwinists, materialists and various masonic forces for that sake and who never hesitate in the face of their pressure and threats are exposed to slanders from these forces that are so influential and powerful in many fields. The slanders about these people who risk all for Allah that will be most damaging in the public eye are without doubt sexual allegations. Indeed, since Mr. Adnan Oktar wages the most effective, courageous and wide-ranging intellectual campaign against Darwinist and materialist circles and various masonic forces he has been subjected to the same false accusations and slanders from those same parties.

This is a huge and blatant defamation because there exists NOT A SINGLE INJURED PARTY, NOT A SINGLE PLAINTIFF AND NOT A SINGLE WITNESS to confirm the sexual allegations against the BAV community. The allegations in question are entirely based on one person, a former model by the name of Ebru Simsek. This person's slanders have been widely published by the Darwinist press, though it never mentions how the fact that Ebru Simsek's allegations against Mr. Oktar and the BAV community are utterly false has been established by a number of court rulings. Likewise, the Wikipedia web site does not carry these facts, merely contenting itself with carrying false allegations against the BAV community. This is one of the most familiar examples of the psychological war being waged 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 BAV 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 BAV MEMBER.
12. Filiz Karatas, who shared a house with Ebru Simsek at the time she began issuing slanders against the BAV 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 BAV members were uninvolved in the matter and THAT THEY HAD ISSUED THIS IMAGINARY ALLEGATION TOGETHER TO SLANDER THE BAV.
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.