ANDREW MARR: In Turkey quiet a lot of academics, professors and so on, feel under pressure, even under threat when they teach Darwinism. How do you respond to their fears and why for instance do you not allow a website by Richard Dawkins to be seen in Turkey? After all this is presumably an argument about free speech for both sides should have the right to put their case.

ADNAN OKTAR: On the very contrary. When you look at the university exams or the exam of another school, people are forced to believe in something in which they do not have faith. For example, although they do not adopt Darwinism, they are forced to accept Darwinist statements in their answers. However, for example, I do not believe in Darwinism. When a question is asked to me in the exam, I should be able to easefully say that I do not believe in Darwinism. But this is not the case. If I say that I do not believe in it, it is deemed that I do not know the answer. This is an example, of course. This, of course, not happens exactly like this. For example, many questions are asked about Darwinism which are not scientific. There is a specific answer they want but it is wrong. Even though people know that it is wrong, they give that specific answer. This is what is anti-democratic, what is coercion and force. And Darwinism is being protected on a state level on a very official way. In England for example a professor was forced to quit his job from the Royal Society. And a very similar thing has happened in Turkey too where a Turkish Professor was again forced to quit his job just because he said that he believed in Creationism and not in Darwinism. These are actually anti-democratic attitudes.

As about Dawkins' internet site, yes I do support freedom of speech and everyone's right to discuss their own ideas in front of the public and I personally invited Dawkins to a discussion so that we would be able to discuss our ideas together in front of the public in a very open way but he did not accept my invitation. What does discussion mean? This means that I will listen to his views, and also want people to hear him. But I also want people to hear my views. In such a case it is impossible to talk of an anti-democratic attitude. Besides, in his site Dawkins made grave insults, that is why his site is closed. That is to say, it is not closed because of a scientific statement he made but because he made indecent insults. If it were you, you would also do the same thing. You would also close that site.