The two different newspapers, in the reports they made in two successive days, revealed groundless claims against Mr. Adnan Oktar and the circles of the Science Research Foundation. The related news repeated the known slanders of some press organs, stating that seven anonymous witnesses testified about this subject.
FIRST OF ALL WE WOULD LIKE TO STATE THAT THE SLANDERS IN THE REPORTS ARE ENTIRELY UNREAL. THE FALSEHOOD OF THE ANONYMOUS WITNESS TESTIMONIES ARE REVEALED BY THE ADJUDICATION.
Indeed, related to the investigation carried out about the testimonies of the anonymous witnesses, the Uskudar Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (No. 2008/1211) gave A VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION. This verdict was APPROVED by Kadikoy High Criminal Court No. 1 (verdict miscellaneous number 2008/1015).
Istanbul Prosecution Office with Special Authorities (formerly the State Security Court) also examined the same file (file no. 2007/3026) in the past and the Prosecution gave A VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION on 13.12.2007. This verdict was also APPROVED by the Ankara High Criminal Court Number 11 (file no. 2008/307).
The prosecution offices did not even find it necessary to open files about the statements of “anonymous witnesses”, which were merely figments of imagination. Not only about the claims of anonymous witnesses but also about those of some families who submitted false complaint petitions did the prosecution offices give VERDICTS OF NON-PROSECUTION.
Some of these are as follows:
1. VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION given by Istanbul Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (Investigation file no. 2007/11089)
2. VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION given by Istanbul Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (Investigation file no. 2007/17087)
3. VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION given by Istanbul Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (Investigation file no. 2007/11092)
4. VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION given by Uskudar Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (Investigation file no.2007/10878)
5. VERDICT OF NON-PROSECUTION given by Uskudar Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor (Investigation file no.2007/6120)
FOR WHICH REASONS THE REPORTS OF THESE TWO DAILIES ARE UNREAL.
While revealing these groundless accusations, these dailies would have a publishing policy based on principles, if they did not conceal the above-mentioned judicial verdicts refuting these accusations and thus provide accurate information to their readers.
The following are the subjects we and the Turkish public opinion are curious about:
1- Which dailies received a total of 1 and a half million TL each—which were drawn at five different dates from the bank accounts of the person in Istanbul known as the secret safe of the so-called Ergenekon terror organization from the bank branches in Mecidiyekoy and Sisli provinces—in order to publish groundless claims against SRF?
2- Who coerced a psychopath, who was personally involved in the murder of his own brother as well as another murder, into giving testimony against the SRF community?
3- Who promised to pay 200 thousand TL in advance and another 200 thousand TL after the completion of the task to the three wretched persons, who earn their living by getting involved in illicit relations and who showed ingratitude to the people who strived to save them from such a life?
4- Who made threats in order to prevent the publication of a book that reveals the liaisons among the so-called Ergenekon terror organization and freemasonry, and the “Baron”, a freemason, and the “the Man of Every Era”?
5- Which journalists participated in the meeting the Kapancılar from Salonica and Karakaslar made in a five-star hotel in Istanbul, Taksim province? What did the old physician and “the Man of Every Era” talk in this meeting?
6- Which dailies are the ones that are not generally known by the public to be owned by the “Baron”? Which journalists are the secret men of the “Baron” who seem to be hostile to the “Baron”? In other words, as “Baron” himself calls it, who are his “secret tools”?
If the dailies in question were to investigate the above-mentioned claims instead of the groundless claims made against the SRF circle, they would illuminate the public, display an example of successful journalism and thus make a beneficial service to the Turkish society.
To be announced to the public with respect,
SCIENCE RESEARCH FOUNDATION
