I got it now. The equivalent of an English relative clause where the relative pronoun is the object:

                  who you do not love > DIK participle.

So simple when someone just opens the knot. Thank you, tunci.

My Try:

That is because the greatest pain you can give to someone is that a person who doesn´t love her steals her heart.

The dictionary gives kendine aşık etmek ´to sweep someone off her feet, to steal someone´s heart´.

But...in my opinion just like there is something wrong in the syntax of the last part. Of course I am wrong but I would feel better if it was

                        aşık olmadığının birini kendine aşık etmesidir

Maybe someone will come and explain it for us.

The Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle has unveiled its controversy movie about national hero Mashall C.G.E Mannerheim.

The title role will be played by Telley Savas Otieno. See the trailer:

http://www.iltalehti.fi/iltvviihde/20120816010549610_a2.shtml

The production team is surprised by the public reaction. Their security level had to be raised because of threats filled with anger and hatred.

What? I always talk to someone.

But seriously, I always thought instrumental is the absolute formal demand of -ş- verbs but your prime minister example shows something else.

Thanks for explaining it, tunci.

With cooperative verbs marked with -ş- (benzeşmek, anlaşmak, konuşmak) instrumental is used. It is a good rule to remember but I don´t know if you can trust it always. At least I think even if we can ´talk to someone´ in English I think it is always ´talk with someone´

                                   biriyle konuşmak

in Turkish, right?

My Try:

The one who discovers happiness in you/provides you with happiness is yours, the rest are just visitors.

Kubat, Bağa gel bostana gel

http://derinsular.com/yakin-tarih-1-lale-devri/

http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A2le_Devri

Hollandalılar sizin hiç Lale devriniz oldu mu?

I always felt there was something unusual about the naming Lale devrisi (1718-30 ). Nations as a rule use other kind of criteria when distinguishing their historical periods: names of rulers and politicians, status of state, war and peace, economic factors etc. Why tulips?

Zira Cumhuriyet döneminde yetişen nesiller, çok önemli gelişmelerin yaşandığı bu 12 yıllık dönemi, ülkenin içinde bulunduğu zor şartlara rağmen zevk ü sefa içinde yaşanılan, laleler konusunda tuhaf bir takıntının söz konusu olduğu bir dönem olarak tanıyorlar. That is because those generations which have been risen up during the Republic know these 12 years as a period which in spite of the hard conditions in the country ment leading life of pleasure and a period which had an odd connection with the tulip subject.

Tulip Era was a period during the long reign of Ahmed III. Grand Vizier Nevşehirli Damad Ibrahim Pasha was a central character in the Ottoman Court. Improving trade relations with Europe was in his interest.

Burada dikkat edilmesi gereken nokta, III. Ahmed ve Damad İbrahim Paşa’nın reform adına Batıya dönerek, herhangi bir zorlayıcı neden olmadan, kendi kararlarıyla çareyi Batıda aramış olmalarıdır. What we should pay attention to here is Ahmed III´s and Damad Ibrahim Pasha´s turning to the West, with their own decision, without being forced by anyone, and the fact that they began to look for solutions in the West.

There was an unusual internal peace and prosperity in the Empire. Instead of soldiers Ottomans began to send ambassadors to Europe. Big changes took place in the society, in the army and in people’s attitudes. Tulip period saw flowering of arts, poetry and architecture which was influenced by the European rococo. The first Ottoman printing press was established. Translated foreign literature was published. People began to ask for new products: paper and textile fabrics were built.

Now we come to the tulip question. Because the reforms of the Tulip era concerned so many fields of life and civilization in general, the only thing that symbolizes them all is the tulip:

Zira bu dönemde üretilen her eserde, resimlerde, kumaşlarda, çinilerde, ebrularda, tezhiplerde ve şiirlerde lale var. That is because during this era the tulip was there in every work of art, in paintings, fabrics, chinaware, marbling, ornamenting and poems.

Lale devrisi ended with a stupid revolt. Ahmed III was forced to abdicate. Later historians have not really done justice to the great achievements of this short period of time:

Laleyi çok sevdik ve sevdiğimiz çok şey gibi öldürdük. We loved the tulip a lot and we killed her just like many other things we have loved.

My Try:

Allah you are the Forgiver and you love forgiving, forgive us also. Amen. Tonight for the sake of mercy may Our Lord accept our prayers. May our Night of Power conduce to benevolence.

I don´t doubt that the writer is truly intelligent. The irritating thing is what he writes is very interesting but you have to undress the words from so many suffixes before you get to the core of the meaning. Like in the very beginning

                     endoktrinasyon yöntemlerinin kullanıldığı bu sistem

what else does the passive form bring to the clause but more heavy load of suffixes and what would be lost if the wrote

                     endoktrinasyon yöntemleri kullanan bu sistem

which would be much easier to understand? But probably the point is to give special stress to the missing subject, the faceless regime who is using these methods. Maybe what has been hidden into the passive forms is the author´s anger.