Protests erupt in Istanbul over ‘Prophet Muhammad' cartoon
The image in LeMan's June 26 issue thought to show the Prophet Muhammad and Moses shaking hands above a bombed-out city in reference to the recent conflict between Israel and Iran.
It drew a swift backlash on social media, where many accused the magazine of insulting Islamic beliefs.
The justice minister, Yılmaz Tunc, announced on Monday evening that an investigation had been opened under a law relating to publicly insulting religious values.
He said: 'No freedom allows mocking a religion's sacred values in such an offensive manner.'
Istanbul's chief prosecutor ordered the arrest of the magazine's editors on the grounds that it had published a cartoon which 'publicly insulted religious values'.
Hundreds of protesters gathered outside LeMan's office on central Istanbul's Istiklal Street on Monday night to express their outrage over the publication, with some armed with sticks and stones.
• Blasphemy work on hold despite rise in extremism reports
Riot police were deployed around the magazine's premises as demonstrators chanted slogans such as 'Kemalist infidels will be held accountable', referring to secular followers of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who founded the Turkish republic and main opposition party the CHP.
The cartoonist, identified by the initials D.P., has been taken into custody, with arrest warrants issued for two editors-in-chief and the managing editor of LeMan, according to the interior minister, Ali Yerlikaya.
One editor-in-chief, Tuncay Akgun, told the AFP news agency by phone from Paris that the image had been misinterpreted and was 'not a caricature of Prophet Muhammad'.
'In this work, the name of a Muslim who was killed in the bombardments [by] Israel is fictionalised as Muhammad. More than 200 million people in the Islamic world are named Muhammad,' he said, saying it had 'nothing to do with Prophet Muhammad'.
He added: 'We would never take such a risk.'
Yerlikaya described the cartoonist as 'despicable' and said 'these shameless people will be held accountable before the law.' He also posted videos showing men being forcibly taken from their homes and dragged into vans by police.
The authorities have recalled the issue containing the cartoon from circulation.
The director of presidential communications, Fahrettin Altun, condemned the publication as an 'immoral attack' on national values.
LeMan rejected claims that their content was 'anti-Muslim' in a statement on social media, apologising to readers who felt offended and saying the cartoon had been misunderstood.
'The cartoonist here wanted to portray the righteousness of the oppressed Muslim people by depicting a Muslim killed by Israel, and he never intended to denigrate religious values,' it said.
Depicting the Prophet Muhammad is widely considered forbidden in Islamic tradition as it is believed to prevent idolatry and preserve the sanctity of his image.
LeMan is known for its provocative satire and has previously faced criticism for cartoons relating to a failed coup attempt in 2016 and religious figures such as the 13th-century poet Rumi.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Brit comedian facing 3 years in hellish Turkey prison for ‘shoplifting' after ‘accidentally' leaving Zara without paying
A BRIT comedian faces up to three years in a Turkish prison after she forgot to pay at a Zara store. Cerys Nelmes, from Bristol, claims she absentmindedly wandered out of the shop with clothes before realising she hadn't paid. 5 5 5 She says she went back to the store in Istanbul to return the items and offered to pay. But despite this, she was detained and accused of shoplifting. Nelmes, who is a rising name in the Bristol comedy scene, took to social media to explain the incident. "On Tuesday I left a Zara store in Istanbul without paying for items," she said. "I returned straight away and handed the items to staff. I was asked to pay and I said I would and the manager accepted this. "To cut a long story short I was then taken to a locked room where hours later after no communication from anyone I was taken away by police and held in a police station and was asked to sign things I couldn't read. "I was put in a prison cell for 24 hours with no food or toilet facilities. "When I asked for water, I was told they didn't understand me." Nelmes was brought before a judge the next day, who permitted her release but barred her from leaving Turkey. She now faces a potential three-year prison sentence. Leaked footage shows terrifying power of new 'vacuum bomb' the GAZAP - one of the world's most destructive non-nuclear weapons The comedian is required to stay in the country while the incident is under investigation. She has appealed to the public for support in the wake of the incident, fearing she might lose her home back in Britain. The ongoing proceedings are leading to her losing work and income. Nelmes has been unable to afford accommodation in Turkey given she had only come for a short holiday but now finds herself banned from leaving. However, she was offered a place to stay by locals. She added: "I am ok and have been taken in by a Turkish family who have given me a bed and food. "I don't deserve all the kind words from people but I am very grateful." The British Embassy has confirmed it is offering support. It comes after a British tourist was dragged out of a holiday bar and beaten by staff after allegedly refusing to pay a £460 drinks bill. Footage from abar in Thailand 's Chiang Mai city shows the holidaymaker being manhandled. The 26-year-old solo traveller was reportedly charged an inflated 20,000 baht - around £460 - for drinks at the Diamond Karaoke Bar. 5 5
BreakingNews.ie
an hour ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Protests planned for Barack Obama's Freedom of Dublin visit in September
Protests are being planned for former US president Barack Obama's visit in September. Obama and his wife have been invited to accept their Freedom of Dublin award during the trip. Advertisement Barack and Michelle Obama were originally given the Freedom of Dublin award in 2017, but have not yet formally accepted it. It is Dublin's highest honour, and is given to individuals whose leadership has made 'a profound contribution to the world'. PRO and secretary of the Irish Anti-War Movement, Jim Roche, said the group protested when Obama visited in 2011 and will protest again in September. He maintains that Obama's contribution to the world is not peaceful. Advertisement "How the industrial military complex works in America, how the presidents have seemingly little power even if they wanted to change it and make real peace in the world, so he wasn't a peace president in that sense," he said. "We're seeing the impact of the development of drone warfare horrifically now in Gaza and of course there's great collaboration between the US military and Israeli military." On the other hand, Lord Mayor Ray McAdam said the couple are more than deserving of the Freedom of Dublin. "During his term in office, he led with a sense of hope and, in terms of Mrs Obama, through her voice she was an inspiration to many young girls and women across the world," he said. The Obamas will not have to worry about paying any customs duties on their trip, at least, as one privilege included in the Freedom of Dublin is the right to bring goods into Dublin through the city gates without paying a fee.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
DoJ drops cases against LA protesters after officers caught making false claims
US immigration officers made false and misleading statements in their reports about several Los Angeles protesters they arrested during the massive demonstrations that rocked the city in June, according to federal law enforcement files obtained by the Guardian. The officers' testimony was cited in at least five cases filed by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) amid the unrest. The DoJ has charged at least 26 people with 'assaulting' and 'impeding' federal officers and other crimes during the protests over immigration raids. Prosecutors, however, have since been forced to dismiss at least eight of those felonies, many of them which relied on officers' inaccurate reports, court records show. The DoJ has also dismissed at least three felony assault cases it brought against Angelenos accused of interfering with arrests during recent immigration raids, the documents show. The rapid felony dismissals are a major embarrassment for the Trump-appointed US attorney for southern California, Bill Essayli, and appeared to be the result of an unusual series of missteps by the DoJ, former federal prosecutors said. The Guardian's review of records found: Out of nine 'assault' and 'impeding' felony cases the DoJ filed immediately after the start of the protests and promoted by the attorney general, Pam Bondi, prosecutors dismissed seven of them soon after filing the charges. In reports that led to the detention and prosecution of at least five demonstrators, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents made false statements about the sequence of events and misrepresented incidents captured on video. One DHS agent accused a protester of shoving an officer, when footage appeared to show the opposite: the officer forcefully pushed the protester. One indictment named the wrong defendant, a stunning error that has jeopardized one of the government's most high-profile cases. 'When I see felonies dismissed, that tells me either the federal officers have filed affidavits that are not truthful and that has been uncovered, or US attorneys reviewing the cases realize the evidence does not support the charges,' said Cristine Soto DeBerry, a former California state prosecutor who is now director of Prosecutors Alliance Action, a criminal justice reform group. She said officers often call for charges that prosecutors don't end up filing, but it was uncommon for the DoJ to file, then dismiss cases, especially numerous felonies in rapid succession. 'It seems this is a way to detain people, hold them in custody, instill fear and discourage people from exercising their first amendment rights,' DeBerry said. There are at least 18 cases brought by the DoJ against LA protesters that prosecutors have not dismissed, covering a wide array of alleged criminal conduct, according to case records the US attorney's office shared with the Guardian. In three of those cases, protesters have agreed to plea deals, including one defendant accused of spitting at an officer and another who allegedly threw rocks. Some still facing charges are accused of throwing bottles and molotov cocktails, pointing a laser at a helicopter and aiding in civil disorder by distributing gas masks. In six of the felony dismissals reviewed by the Guardian, the DoJ has re-filed lower-level misdemeanors against the defendants. For the many protesters whose charges were withdrawn or scaled back, the officers' initial allegations, as well as the DoJ's filings, have deeply impacted their lives. All the demonstrators who won dismissals spent time in jail before the government's cases against them fell apart. 'We are not the violent ones,' said Jose Mojica, one of the protesters whose assault case was dismissed, in an earlier Guardian interview. 'They are chasing down innocent people.' The DoJ's initial wave of cases stemmed from one of the first major protests in the LA region, a demonstration on 7 June in the south Los Angeles city of Paramount. Border patrol sightings had sparked fears that agents were targeting laborers at a Home Depot, and as dozens of locals and demonstrators gathered outside an office complex that houses DHS, officers fired teargas and flash-bang grenades while some protesters threw objects. The US attorney's office filed a joint case against five demonstrators, charging each with assaulting officers, a felony the DoJ warned could carry 20-year sentences. A criminal complaint, written by DHS and filed in court by the DoJ on 8 June, said that as the crowd grew, some protesters 'turned violent'. Two sisters, Ashley, 20, and Joceline Rodriguez, 26, began 'blocking' officers' vehicles, the complaint alleged. When a border patrol agent attempted to move Ashley, she 'resisted' and 'shoved the agent with both her hands', then Joceline 'grabbed the arm' of one of the agents to prevent her sister's arrest, the charges said. Both were arrested. In an investigative file, DHS suggested that 'in response' to the sisters' arrest, Christian Cerna-Camacho, another protester, began to 'verbally harass' agents, making threatening remarks. Demonstrator Brayan Ramos-Brito, then 'pushed [an] agent in the chest', DHS claimed, at which point, a fifth protester, Jose Mojica, 'used his body to physically shield' Ramos-Brito and then 'elbowed and pushed' agents. Agents then 'subdued' and arrested Mojica and Ramos-Brito, the complaint said. All five defendants are Latino US citizens. DHS's own subsequent reports, however, reveal multiple factual discrepancies in the narrative initially presented by officers and prosecutors. While the complaint suggested Cerna-Camacho, Ramos Brito and Mojica attacked agents in protest of the sisters' arrest, records show the women were arrested in a separate incident – which occurred after the men were detained. Border patrol agent Eduardo Mejorado, a key witness considered a victim of the assaults, appeared to initially give inaccurate testimony about the order of events. He 'clarified' the timeline when questioned, a DHS special agent wrote in a report three days after charges were filed. A supervisor on the scene also documented the correct chronology in a later report and 'apologized' for errors, saying, 'Due to the chaos of the events that day, some events may have been miscommunicated'. Mojica had outlined the discrepancies in an interview with the Guardian days after his arrest. The DHS special agent also noted that defense lawyers had presented video they said was 'in direct contrast to the facts' laid out in the initial complaint. The footage, seen by the Guardian, appeared to show an agent pushing Ramos-Brito, not the other way around, before he was taken to the ground along with Mojica, who was also not seen in the footage shoving or assaulting agents. The agent acknowledged the officer's shoving and said the subsequent 'fight' was 'hard to decipher'. The agent also claimed Ramos-Brito's behavior before he was pushed included 'pre-assault indicators', such as 'clenching fists' and 'getting in [the agent's] face'. Meanwhile, chaotic social media footage of the arrest of the sisters appeared to show an officer pushing Ashley, prompting her to briefly raise her hand, at which point two agents grabbed her and took her to the ground. Her older sister was then seen briefly touching the arm of one of the agents on top of her sister. Both appeared to be filming with their phones before their arrests, and it's unclear who DHS and the DoJ were alleging were the victims in their purported assaults. DHS records also show that one supervisor emailed a female border patrol agent seen in the video standing near the sisters, saying he was 'trying to tie that whole event together for prosecution' and looking into a 'rumor' Ashley 'may have shoved' this agent. The agent responded that she had told Ashley to move, but did not say she was shoved. Within two weeks of the initial charges, the US attorney's office filed motions to dismiss the cases against the sisters, Ramos-Brito and Mojica 'in the interest of justice', without providing further explanation. The DoJ then filed a new case against the sisters, this time accusing them each of a single misdemeanor, saying they 'assaulted, resisted, opposed, impeded, intimidated, and interfered with' border patrol, but offering no detail. The sisters pleaded not guilty to the misdemeanors; Ashley's lawyer declined to comment and Joceline's attorney did not respond to inquiries. The DoJ also filed a misdemeanor indictment against Ramos-Brito, but then said it was erroneous and rescinded it, only to refile a misdemeanor in a different format. Ramos-Brito pleaded not guilty and his lawyer didn't respond to emails. Mojica, who spoke out about how he was injured during his arrest, has not been charged again. Essayli, the US attorney for LA, who is an ardent Trump supporter appointed this year, initially published mugshots of the defendants, but has not publicly acknowledged that he has since dismissed their felonies. Ciaran McEvoy, a spokesperson for Essayli, declined to comment on a detailed list of questions about specific cases. The LA Times reported last week that Essayli was heard 'screaming' at a prosecutor over a grand jury's refusal to indict one of the protesters. McEvoy said the LA Times story relied on 'factual inaccuracies and anonymous gossip', without offering specifics, adding in an email: 'Our office will continue working unapologetically to charge all those who assault our agents or impede our federal investigations.' Bondi defended Essayli in a statement, calling him a 'champion for law and order who has done superlative work to prosecute rioters for attacking and obstructing law enforcement in Los Angeles'. She added: 'This Department of Justice is proud of Bill, and he has my complete support as he continues working to protect Californians and Make America Safe Again.' Jaime Ruiz, a spokesperson for Customs and Border Protection, which oversees border patrol, did not respond to detailed questions about cases and officers' inaccurate testimony, saying the department is 'unable to comment on cases under active litigation'. 'DHS and its components continue to enforce the law every day in greater Los Angeles even in the face of danger,' he added. 'Our officers are facing a surge in assaults and attacks against them as they put their lives on the line to enforce our nation's laws. Secretary [Kristi] Noem has been clear: If you obstruct or assault our law enforcement, you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.' Tricia McLaughlin, DHS assistant secretary, added in a statement: 'Our agents, officers, and prosecutors will continue to work together to keep Americans safe, and we will follow the facts, evidence, and law.' Mejorado, the border patrol agent, could not be reached. Cerna-Camacho is the only defendant of the five whose original charges are still pending, but when he showed up to court for his recent arraignment, the DoJ attorney was forced to admit his office had made an error: the one-paragraph indictment filed against Cerna-Camacho erroneously named Ramos Brito. Cerna-Camacho's lawyers have argued that the government's 30-day window to indict his client had passed, and the case must be dismissed. Cerna-Camacho pleaded not guilty, and his lawyer declined to comment. 'This is an extraordinary mistake and a dangerous embarrassment,' said Sergio Perez, a former DoJ lawyer who is now executive director of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, a California-based legal advocacy group, about Cerna-Camacho's case. 'The US Department of Justice is supposed to be the pinnacle of professional and responsible criminal prosecutions. When you can't get the name right, it calls into question all other factual assertions in those documents. It's way beyond a clerical error. It's smoke where there is likely fire.' The case is a significant one for the Trump administration. Cerna-Camacho was arrested four days after the protest, when two unmarked vehicles rammed his car while his toddler and infant were inside, with officers deploying teargas. The incident caused outrage locally. But DHS aggressively defended the arrest, publishing a photo of Cerna-Camachobeing detained, and saying he had 'punched' a border patrol officer at the Paramount protests. Video from the protest showed Cerna-Camacho and an officer scuffling in a chaotic crowd, with Cerna-Camacho at one point raising his hand, but it's unclear if he made contact with the officer. In an initial complaint against Jacob Terrazas, DHS accused the man of felony assault, saying he was 'one of several individuals … actively throwing hard objects [at officers]' during the Paramount protests, without referencing specific evidence or details. Video of his arrest showed an officer slamming him to the ground, and at his arraignment, Terrazas appeared badly concussed, and a judge ordered he immediately get medical attention. Terrazas was released after nine days in jail, then two days later, the DoJ moved to dismiss the case. However, prosecutors filed a new misdemeanor charge, accusing him of a 'simple assault' misdemeanor, saying he 'aided and abetted' others and 'forcibly assaulted, resisted, opposed, impeded, intimidated, and interfered with' a border patrol employee, without providing details. Tarrazas has pleaded not guilty, and his lawyer did not respond to inquiries. The government has also dismissed its 'conspiracy to impede an officer' felony charges against Gisselle Medina, but then filed an 'accessory' to 'assault' misdemeanor, claiming in a brief charging document that she had 'assisted the offenders'. The charges did not offer any details on how she allegedly assisted others. Medina has not yet been arraigned and her lawyer did not respond to inquiries. The DoJ also recently dismissed felony assault charges against Russell Gomez Dzul, who had been stopped 7 June by border patrol when officers deemed him suspicious for appearing 'nervous' near them and biking away, but then filed a simple assault misdemeanor, without offering details. He has pleaded not guilty and his lawyer did not respond to requests for comment. Andrea Velez, a US citizen arrested during a 24 June raid in downtown LA on her way to work, also had a felony assault charge dismissed this month, and has not faced further prosecution. One of the only cases from the first round of prosecutions that the government has not dropped is the one that made international headlines – the arrest of David Huerta, a prominent California union leader jailed while observing an immigration raid. Carley Palmer, a lawyer who served as a supervisor in the US attorney's office in LA until she left last year, said the dismissals and downgrading of charges likely occurred after more in-depth evaluation by line prosecutors and supervisors, and in some ways reflected 'the process working': 'We want prosecutors to feel they can reevaluate evidence and change their mind when new information comes to light.' Prosecutors might dismiss cases if a grand jury declines to indict, if they believe they can't persuade jurors at trial, or if they learn officers violated the defendants' rights, she added. The LA Times reported that Essayli has struggled to secure indictments at grand juries. Palmer, now an attorney at the Halpern May Ybarra Gelberg firm, said it was unusual, however, for the office to prosecute these kinds of 'he said she said' protest scuffles in the first place, taking away resources from traditional priorities, including fraud, economic crimes, public corruption and civil rights abuses. 'Federal charges are very serious and have real implications for people's lives,' Palmer added. 'Even if it gets dismissed, it will be on someone's record for the rest of their lives. It carries a lot of consequences, so you want prosecutors to understand and appreciate the power they have.'
