IHH Leader Bulent Yildirim Gave an Interview Focusing on the U.S. Intention to Designate the IHH as a Terrorist Organization and on the Mavi Marmara Incident

8/6/2019 IHH Leader Bulent Yildirim Gave an Interview Focusing on the U.S. Intention to Designate the IHH as a Terrorist Org

1/9

December 6, 2010

The Meir Amit Intelligenceand Terrorism Information

Center

320-10

IHH leader Bulent Yildirim gave an interview focusing onthe U.S. intention to designate the IHH as a terrorist

organization and on the Mavi Marmara incident. Yildirim

claimed Zionists controlled the U.S. and world media. Heaccused Israel of massacring the Mavi Marmara passengersand defended IHH assistance to Hamas.

Bulent Yildirims interview on the Turkish newspaper Star


2/9

2

Overview

1.On November 14, 2010, Bulent Yildirim, the leader of the IHH, a Turkish organization

which played a major role in the latest flotilla, gave an interview to the Islamic government-

affiliated newspaper Star. The interview focused on the Mavi Marmara incident and thedevelopments that followed.

2.The interview consisted of two major parts:

a.In the first part, Bulent Yildirim discussed at length a motion by the U.S.

Congress to designate the IHH as a terrorist organization. He once again used

the anti-Semitic motif according to which the Zionists (a term which now

substitutes the Jews) control the U.S., including the president, the Congress, the

administration, and the media. He said that the Zionism also controls the drug

and w eapons industries and the media across the globe.

b.In the second part of the interview, Yildirim discussed the Mavi Marmara

incident. He once again accused Israel of deliberately massacring innocent

passengers, claiming they had carried no weapons. He defended the assistance

extended by the IHH to Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and threatened that the IHH

would not leave Israel alone until it l ifted the so-called siege of the Gaza

Strip. Yildirim made the far-fetched claim that Israel had committ ed the Mavi

Marmara m assacre to let Turkey know that I srael is the country that ownsthe Mediterranean Sea, with its oil and gas resources (according to Yildirim's

allegation, the site of the raid on the Mavi Marmara is the location where Israel wants to

produce underwater gas). He made another grotesque claim according to which Israel

had been planning to attack Gaza and Lebanon and commit a massacre there, and that

only the humanitarian aid organizations that organized the flotilla had taken action to

prevent that from happening.

3.The interview provides an insight into the character and thought patterns of IHH

leader Bulent Yildirim. He appears to hold radical Islamic views, adhere to extreme anti-

Semitic beliefs drawn from The Protocol s of the Elders of Zion, and harbor hostility

towards t he U.S. and Israel. The unfounded narrative of the Mavi Marmara flotilla which he

repeatedly disseminates in interviews to Islamic Turkish target audiences is aimed, in our

assessment, to divert criticism and complaints voiced in Turkey against the IHH, and

at the same time provide the IHH with the platform to continue helping Hamas, with the

Turkish government's support (even though Yildirim portrays the IHH as an independent

organization).


3/9

3

4.It should be mentioned that, in a speech given about two months prior to the flotilla, Yildirim

had described it as a constituent in the campaign against the infidels (including Israel, the

U.S., Russia, and China) who rob the Muslims, and argued that if Muslims could control

Jerusalem, they would control the world.1

5.See Appendix for the main points of Bulent Yildirims interview.

nths priorIn a speech given by IHH leader Bulent Yildirim two moSee our September 5, 2010 Information Bulletin:1Israeli motifs. He said that-Western and anti-to the Marmara flotilla, he presented a radical Islamic ideology with anti

the aim of the flotilla was to isolate Israel by breaking the siege and stressed his determination to reach Gaza.
http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htmhttp://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htmhttp://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htmhttp://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htmhttp://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htmhttp://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htmhttp://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htmhttp://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htmhttp://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htmhttp://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htmhttp://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e123.htm


4/9

4

Appendix

Main points of the interview given by IHHleader Bulent Yildirim to the Turk ish

newspaper Star

Overview

1.On November 14, 2010, the Turkish daily Star published an interview given by IHH leader

Bulent Yildirim to Star reporter Fadime zkan. The interview focused on the Mavi Marmara

incident and the developments that had followed. The article begins by saying that the

backdrop for the interview was the possibility that the IHH w ould be designated as a

terrorist organization in the U.S. in the w ake of the Mavi M armara incident, and the

expectation that Israel wou ld submit the findings of its internal enquiry committee

to the UN Secretary General.

2.An Islamist daily, Star is considered to be affiliated with the Turkish government. The

wording of the questions and the way they were presented to Bulent Yildirim is a possible sign,

in our assessment, that the interview was staged and that the questions and answers had

been scripted in advance to provide the IHH leader with a proper platform to respond to his

critics and present his views to Islamic Turkish target audiences (Yildirim expresses himself

differently to his partner Western human rights organizations and to world public opinion).

The Jews dominate the U.S. and the world

3.In the beginning of the interview, Bulent Yildirim was asked to address the motion by the

U.S. Congress to designate the IHH as a terrorist organization. The main theme of his detailed

answer was the claim that the U.S. is ruled by Zionism.2

4.The main points of Bulent Yildirims reply w ere as follows:

a.The motion to designate the IHH as a terrorist organization was born following the

Mavi Marmara incident and was the initiative of Jewish Congressmen. It

demonstrates just how much influence Jews h ave on life in the U.S. and to

what ex tent they have been able to enslave that country. Collecting signatures

2 Anti-Semitism in the Arab/Muslim world is usually aimed against Israel as a Zionist-Jewish state, being the concreteenemy, and the Jewish people, perceived to be a supporter of Israel. In many cases no clear distinction is madebetween vicious criticism against Israel on one hand and against the Zionist movement and the Jewishpeople on the other.


5/9

5

in the Congress to submit the motion demonstrates better than anything else the

dirty face of the Congress.According to Yildirim, if the initiative is passed, it would

expose the dirty face of the Zionists in the U.S..

b.Bulent Yildirim noted that the Zionists are fond of saying, Give us the money of any

country, and we will make sure to pass any laws we see fit, thus running that

country.He added that, under the system used in the U.S., The funds which th e

Zionists provide allow the election of the senators and the ministers.

President Obama is concerned about that phenomenon; consequently, the U.S., in its

UN votes, has positioned itself with the occupying, unjust, and dishonest Zionists. He

further added, Therefore, Obama, during his term, can allow himself to be

enslaved by the Zionists.

c.The IHH will not cooperate with the U.S. Congress. Ours is the right way. The whole

world knows we are right. According to Yildirim, the Zionists have lost some of

their pow er in the U.S., while the Muslims there, despite the hardship and torture

they undergo, represent Islam in a respectable manner. Israeli-influenced American

media has taken Israels side as usual. However, Alternative U.S. media has gained a

kind of power it never had before. He also said that the ever-increasing human rights

organizations were able to deal with the Israeli manipulations.

5.Bulent Yildirim was then asked by the reporter about the measures he deemed necessary to

deal with the world media, which also supported Israel and slammed the IHH. His response

to that question was also exploited for an anti-Semitic incitement: according to

Yildirim, the Zionism rules the world in four spheres: the drug industry, the food industry,

the weapons industry, and the media. The media provides considerable power to the spheres

of fuel, finance, and weapons. That is the foundation used by the Zionists to handle

world media.The Zionists acquire media across the globe, Yildirim said.

6.In an attempt to cast himself in a heroic light, Yildirim said that during his interrogations in

Israel, the interrogators had threatened to use all the might of (Zionist) propaganda against

the IHH. His response was, Not this time []] From this day on, no matter what your media

says, no matter how many Hollywood movies you make, people have started using their

brains The whole world watched your Mavi Marmara massacre on television. Try as you

might to explain your position, youve lost3

3 Later in the interview, Bulent Yildirim told nonsensical stories about what he had been through during his detainmentin Israel. For example, he claimed that Mossad interrogators had given him a DNA test to see what kind of toxinscould harm his body.


6/9

6

Israels motives in taking over the Mavi Marmara

7.Later in the interview, Bulent Yildirim extensively discussed the Mavi Marmara incident. He

claimed that Israel had intended to kill innocent Turkish civilians and the attack on the ship

was tantamount to an attack on Turkey. Referring to the claim that the flotilla was aprovocation aimed to grant Hamas a legal status, Bulent Yildirim claimed that Hamas was

legal because it ran in the election and won it. Is it a crime that they [Hamas] gained the

peoples trust? he asked.

8.Yildirim listed t he motives behind the flotil la organized by t he IHH , raising false,

baseless claims. According to Yildirim, while the IHH is a humanitarian organization, it

does not conceal its Islamic identity. Being an Islamic organization, the IHH had to

intervene to prevent Israel from engaging in actions that would lead to a world

war. He further added,If it w asnt for the Mavi Marmara, Israel would be willing to

attack in Gaza and in Lebanon and com mit a m assacre there, and then everybody

would have to intervene. We know ingly prevented a war. When asked, You say that

based on what information? Bulent Yildirim replied, Everybody knows that! All the

strategists! Israel prepared for war. It stocked up on weapons after [Operation] Cast

Lead. All of its storehouses were full. It w as going to commit a m assacre. The important

thing is that the humanitarian aid organizations took action to prevent that from

happening.

9.Bulent Yildirim said, Prior to the launch of the flotilla, we had consulted with maritime law

specialists to make sure that the flotilla was not illegal. He further added, Do you k now

why Israel attacked us? The site approved by the Israeli General Staff is the same

site where they now want to extract underwater gas. Bulent Yildirim went on to

develop that idea: South of Cyprus there are large gas and oil deposits. That area belongs to

Turkey, Israel, Lebanon, Egypt, and southern Cyprus. Israel attacked us there to send a

message to the other countries: I am going to extract that gas. I own the

Mediterranean Sea. The message it sent to Turkey w as, Dont you dare com ing to

this region . Were in charge here.

Other claims on the Mavi Marmara incident and thebehavior of the IHH

10.Bulent Yildirim took advantage of the interview to reiterate well-known claims already made

by the IHH (and Turkey) about the flotilla:

a.IHH operatives carried no weapons. According to Yildirim, the Mavi Marmara

passengers were civilians who carried nothing but humanitarian aid. He noted,We legally left the Turkish customs The customs searched us and let the whole world


7/9

7

know what cargo we carried on board the ships(note: numerous cold weapons were

found on board the Mavi Marmara, including knives, clubs, axes, and slingshots,

which had been prepared in advance and brought on board in Istanbul, to the best of

our knowledge).

b.Israel is accused of a premeditated m assacre of Mavi Marm ara passengers.

Yildirim claims that if it wasnt for the Israelis intentions to commit a massacre, they

could have first taken over the other ships, with only 10-12 passengers on board.

Instead, they chose to attack the ship with the most passengers [i.e., the Mavi

Marmara] because "they were planning to k ill and thus send a message to the

whole w orld and to Turkey.He said that the families of the victims had filed

an appeal to the international tribunal in Hague, but added it was doubtful that

the trial would actually take place.

c.Warnings received by the IHH from Turkey. Yildirim stressed that the IHH was

an independent, autonomous civilian organization. According to Yildirim, the

organization does not follow the dictates of the Turkish government, and it does not

matter which government is currently in power. When the ship [Mavi Marmara] set

sail, Yildirim said, we held official discussions with the authorities. The government

presented its ideas to us. We were warned that Israel could take action, that it could do

this or that, that things could become unpleasant; we were told [by the Turkish

government] that w e should give up and call it off. We took th e term attack

to mean th at they [the Israelis] could damage the ships propellers and try to

stop it.Bulent Yildirim stressed once again that The government definitely did

warn us. It has to protect its citizens. It held talks with the U.S., Israel, and Egypt.

Yildirim added that the possibility of a military takeover by Israel was not on

our minds and that if it had been, they may have terminated our activity as

a civilian organization.4

d.Bulent Yildirims relations with Foreign Minister Davutoglu: in response to a

question about the issue, Yildirim responded that We know and cherish Ahmet

Davutoglu, but We have no special relations with him. Yildirim does not deny that

The government has taken us under its w ing, explaining that it was a necessity

dictated by reality as far as the Turkish government was concerned: Are we not citizens

of this country? The behavior of the prime minister, the president, and the

4 This is a biased account aimed to counter accusations against the government of Turkey of failing to prevent theflotilla from setting sail, as well as claims about the IHH being responsible for the clash despite having been warned bythe Turkish government. The account contradicts previous remarks made by Yildirim prior to the launch of the flotilla,during a speech given in an Istanbul suburb about two months before the flotilla (March 31). He listed three possiblescenarios that could take place during the flotillas voyage. The third scenario was thatIsrael could go crazy andattack the flotilla. He added that the third scenario included the possibility of Israel opening fire: What canIsrael do? Wil l it open fire on us? Those who came on board the ship have taken that into account. Wehave made up our mi nds. Weve succeeded as soon as we have m ade up our minds...


8/9

8

foreign minister flattered us and moved us They said that the Turkish

government would protect us, and flags were raised everywhere in Turkey. If Turkey

had not protected us, it w ould have been selling itself short.

e.The demands from Israel following the flotil la: according to Yildirim, the flotilla

resulted in the emergence of a new reality that Israel w ould have to pay for.

He accused Israel of killing nine people by long-range fire (note: IDF soldiers used

live ammunition only when they had no choice and when it was necessary for self-

defense, that is, when they were attacked and their lives were in imminent danger). He

added that prior to the flotilla, the IHHs goal was to draw attention to the siege

[on] Gaza. Now that blood was spilled, Turkey demanded that I srael apologize

and pay damages, which could prove useful. However, he added that the demand of

the IHH and "the people of conscience" was that the siege on Gaza be

lifted.

f.The IHH has ties with the Hamas administration in the Gaza Strip. Yildirim

noted that people from the U.S. and Europe asked him what government they met with

when they came to Gaza. The answer: With the Hamas leadership. In Gaza, we

cooperate with Hamas, because they are in power. Yildirim also rejected the

claims on smuggling weapons to the Gaza Strip by addressing the people making such

claims (as well as Israel): Who can smuggle weapons to the Gaza Strip? You closed it

off from all sides(note: in practice, weapons and terrorist operatives are brought into

the Gaza Strip in extensive smuggling operations, despite the preventive measures

taken by Israel and Egypt).

g.The results of the UN inquiry panel.Yildirim was asked about the possible results

of the UN inquiry panel (headed by Geoffrey Palmer, appointed by the UN Secretary

General) in light of the conclusions Israel was about to give it in mid-November.5

Yildirim stressed that theUN Commission [on Human R ights] confirmed that we

are right; accordingly, he went on to claim that the report published following

the inquiry w ould be a political report.However, Yildirim expressed his hope that

the report published by the inquiry panel appointed by the UN Secretary General would

be positive, too: What can they say? We were sailing in the open sea, as unarmed

civilians. Israel carried out an armed intervention. The best they can do is to say that we

caused a provocation. Even if we did, so what? Is Israel stupid enough to respond to

such a provocation?... Will they ask [us] why we resisted? They [the Israelis] came with

armed forces, what could we do?

5 Soon after the incident, the UN Commission on Human Rights released a one-sided report strongly biased againstIsrael.


9/9

9

h.The nature of the IHH:Yildirim defined the IHH as an organization fighting against

world injustice, analyzing the political reality in various places across the globe. He did

not go into details about the organizations activity. He claimed that the IHH began

receiving more donations following the Mavi M armara incident, even though his

organization did not chase donations. When asked about the IHHs budget, Yildirim

replied that it was about 120-130 million new Turkish liras (around 100 million

dollars), used by the organization to provide aid to 125 countries.

Documents

IHH Leader Bulent Yildirim Gave an Interview Focusing on the U.S. Intention to Designate the IHH as a Terrorist Organization and on the Mavi Marmara Incident