|
 The days we are going through are hard ones; these are days where almost all of us have difficulty being ourselves.
We are more or less taken captive by feelings of revenge, showing off and holding others accountable. Such periods make the word "empathy" vital. There is only one condition: being sincere, remembering that others are honored just as we are and admitting that our truth is not the sole truth out there.
We have to be wise enough to calm our emotions down and imagine ourselves in others' shoes. Fethullah Gülen taught me this life lesson. "Your sensitivity and attention not to hurt others also prevents you from being hurt." We have to adopt a character of understanding, not being pleased by their sufferings, contaminating their joyous and happy times.
There is a growing need for people among the clashing parties to emphasize reasonable thinking and repress emotions. However, if we were to think about the future and not the present, we would be able to see that fighting and clashing will be of no use to anyone and will lead to loss for most, if not all. Why are we contaminating each others' lives while there is a great opportunity to coexist peacefully in this country? Why do we fail to admit that we cannot get anywhere with tightened fists? Why do we fail to forgive all those we can?
Aydin Dogan through his lawyer sent in a disclaimer for my essay published last Thursday. I quote the statement verbatim:
Dear Hüseyin Gülerce,
In your column 'Who is part of Ergenekon's media leg?' published on July 10, 2008 you alleged that a meeting took place between my client Aydin Dogan and Workers' Party [İP] leader Dogu Perinçek in reliance on a speech by a person whose statements were apparently considered as evidence in the Ergenekon investigation.
In your quote, it is alleged that in this meeting held in the aftermath of the Susurluk scandal, Aydin Dogan told Dogu Perinçek that he would do his best to make sure that Milliyet would not make any news report on [detained retired Gen.] Veli Küçük while he would not interfere with Radikal's business, and that even though Hürriyet appears to be owned by himself, it actually belonged to Rahmi Koç.
In the final part of the essay, there are statements suggesting that you also consider these allegations accurate. We have understood from the readers' comments which appeared underneath the Web version of the essay and included criticisms that these assertions contained in your essay were regrettably considered accurate.
My client Aydin Dogan has never met with Perinçek during the period when the Susurluk scandal was discussed in the media. Because no such meeting was held, it is impossible that these alleged talks actually took place. We do not feel it is necessary to make mention of the lack of seriousness in the content of the alleged remarks attributed to Aydin Dogan.
That you took these remarks which may be considered rubbish seriously and published these allegations in your column was met with regret and perplexity by my client.
I, as his authorized attorney, hereby request the publication of this disclaimer in your column under Article 14 of the Press Law.
Attorney of Aydin Dogan
Sehnaz Yüzer, Esq.
|
