Tweet
THOSE WHO TALK, THOSE WHO KEEP SILENT, AND THOSE WHO ARE BUSYBODIES
Ekrem Dumanli
www.worldbulletin.net
Jan 15 2009
Turkey
Susurluk or Ergenekon? Or both? What did we have in the Susurluk
case? An outlaw, a police chief and a deputy in a car that crashed
into a truck. The car's trunk was full of weapons.
Was there a weapons depot? No. There was only a mention of
lost weapons. Those were never found. Were there assassination
plots? No. Labeling people according to their ideologies,
videocassettes for blackmailing, bombings, murder... None of these
were at hand with respect to Susurluk, but media organizations were
storming in a teacup nonetheless. This was because, with a wrong move,
the political figures of the time mistakenly described Susurluk as
an unimportant and trivial event. Eventually, the well-established
rule of politics stepped in: The government that failed to wind up
its shadowy network was toppled by that network.
On the other hand, what do we have in the Ergenekon
case? Everything! Plots for military takeover of democratic governance,
establishing organizations to this end, organizing events to create
chaos, assassinations, burying weapons in the ground, categorizing
people according to their ideologies, plotting to kill well-known
Armenian and Alevi figures, and the list goes on. The information
and documents obtained have already been made public in about
2,000 pages of the indictment. A supplementary indictment is being
prepared. Meanwhile, new detentions are being made, from retired
generals to military officers on active duty. Some of them are being
released. This means that the legal process in underway.
If the Ergenekon investigation unearths a network that is much more
far-reaching, deeper and more dangerous than Susurluk, then why do some
people defend so blindly this network? Moreover, why do those who in
the past aggressively defended democracy against Susurluk opt to pose
themselves as in favor of the Ergenekon network? Why do they act so as
to negate all their past actions? Adopting a negative stance against
the shadowy networks was the right thing to do in the past. Those who
were sincere in their past stance must show the democratic courage,
saying that the Ergenekon investigation must go wherever it may reach.
Those who are detained as part of the Ergenekon investigation
insistently claim that they respect the judicial process. For instance,
Kemal Yavuz said: "I still respect the police department and judicial
organs." While the former commander says so, those who declare
themselves as Ergenekon's lawyers are barking at the judiciary and
the police department. Who is right? Those who are plus royaliste
que le roi? These days some ask insistently: Why do those detained
under the Ergenekon investigation start to keep silent? Actually,
the answer is simple: First, there must be concrete information and
documents in the case file and, second, the suspects are respectful of
the legal process and expect the prosecution to proceed in a healthy
manner. Isn't this the question that must be asked? Why do those who
do not know the content of the case file speak so sharply and why are
they so sure of themselves -- although every day new weapons depots
are being unearthed -- and attempt to put pressure on the judiciary?
For instance, until when will this Supreme Board of Prosecutors and
Judges (HSYK) be hanging over the Ergenekon network like the sword
of Damocles? Everyone knows that this HSYK has been convicted in
the collective conscience of the nation by removing the Å~^emdinli
prosecutor from office. Now, this board is being mentioned in all
scenarios related to the Ergenekon prosecutors. A few days ago, one of
the HSYK members said to the Radikal daily that they might convene
on Thursday to discuss Ergenekon. Won't the general public ask:
Are you plotting a new Å~^emdinli?
There is also the head of the Judges and Prosecutors Association
(YARSAV), who continues to act as a prosecutor. This guy is utterly
Mr. Wrong and his statements are foul. If you are so ambitious, then
remove your prosecutor's cloak and stop giving political statements
in the building of the Supreme Court of Appeals and start a political
career. Unfortunately, when you speak, you disparage your fellow
colleagues and cast a shadow over the judicial independence and confirm
the suspicions that the judiciary has been politicized. Yet, weirdly,
not a single criticism is raised against him from certain media
organizations. Also, interestingly, he is creating a number of excuses
in front of the busybody "Ergenekon lawyers" of the media who in the
past organized democratic actions against the Susurluk network. Go
with it! But be sure that the collective conscience will this time
not allow those attempt to conceal Ergenekon. Those who exert their
best efforts to hide Ergenekon must learn their lesson from Susurluk
if they do not want history to record their names as network members.
--Boundary_(ID_BW6blz9MM1v5X/SV9qRU5A)--
Ekrem Dumanli
www.worldbulletin.net
Jan 15 2009
Turkey
Susurluk or Ergenekon? Or both? What did we have in the Susurluk
case? An outlaw, a police chief and a deputy in a car that crashed
into a truck. The car's trunk was full of weapons.
Was there a weapons depot? No. There was only a mention of
lost weapons. Those were never found. Were there assassination
plots? No. Labeling people according to their ideologies,
videocassettes for blackmailing, bombings, murder... None of these
were at hand with respect to Susurluk, but media organizations were
storming in a teacup nonetheless. This was because, with a wrong move,
the political figures of the time mistakenly described Susurluk as
an unimportant and trivial event. Eventually, the well-established
rule of politics stepped in: The government that failed to wind up
its shadowy network was toppled by that network.
On the other hand, what do we have in the Ergenekon
case? Everything! Plots for military takeover of democratic governance,
establishing organizations to this end, organizing events to create
chaos, assassinations, burying weapons in the ground, categorizing
people according to their ideologies, plotting to kill well-known
Armenian and Alevi figures, and the list goes on. The information
and documents obtained have already been made public in about
2,000 pages of the indictment. A supplementary indictment is being
prepared. Meanwhile, new detentions are being made, from retired
generals to military officers on active duty. Some of them are being
released. This means that the legal process in underway.
If the Ergenekon investigation unearths a network that is much more
far-reaching, deeper and more dangerous than Susurluk, then why do some
people defend so blindly this network? Moreover, why do those who in
the past aggressively defended democracy against Susurluk opt to pose
themselves as in favor of the Ergenekon network? Why do they act so as
to negate all their past actions? Adopting a negative stance against
the shadowy networks was the right thing to do in the past. Those who
were sincere in their past stance must show the democratic courage,
saying that the Ergenekon investigation must go wherever it may reach.
Those who are detained as part of the Ergenekon investigation
insistently claim that they respect the judicial process. For instance,
Kemal Yavuz said: "I still respect the police department and judicial
organs." While the former commander says so, those who declare
themselves as Ergenekon's lawyers are barking at the judiciary and
the police department. Who is right? Those who are plus royaliste
que le roi? These days some ask insistently: Why do those detained
under the Ergenekon investigation start to keep silent? Actually,
the answer is simple: First, there must be concrete information and
documents in the case file and, second, the suspects are respectful of
the legal process and expect the prosecution to proceed in a healthy
manner. Isn't this the question that must be asked? Why do those who
do not know the content of the case file speak so sharply and why are
they so sure of themselves -- although every day new weapons depots
are being unearthed -- and attempt to put pressure on the judiciary?
For instance, until when will this Supreme Board of Prosecutors and
Judges (HSYK) be hanging over the Ergenekon network like the sword
of Damocles? Everyone knows that this HSYK has been convicted in
the collective conscience of the nation by removing the Å~^emdinli
prosecutor from office. Now, this board is being mentioned in all
scenarios related to the Ergenekon prosecutors. A few days ago, one of
the HSYK members said to the Radikal daily that they might convene
on Thursday to discuss Ergenekon. Won't the general public ask:
Are you plotting a new Å~^emdinli?
There is also the head of the Judges and Prosecutors Association
(YARSAV), who continues to act as a prosecutor. This guy is utterly
Mr. Wrong and his statements are foul. If you are so ambitious, then
remove your prosecutor's cloak and stop giving political statements
in the building of the Supreme Court of Appeals and start a political
career. Unfortunately, when you speak, you disparage your fellow
colleagues and cast a shadow over the judicial independence and confirm
the suspicions that the judiciary has been politicized. Yet, weirdly,
not a single criticism is raised against him from certain media
organizations. Also, interestingly, he is creating a number of excuses
in front of the busybody "Ergenekon lawyers" of the media who in the
past organized democratic actions against the Susurluk network. Go
with it! But be sure that the collective conscience will this time
not allow those attempt to conceal Ergenekon. Those who exert their
best efforts to hide Ergenekon must learn their lesson from Susurluk
if they do not want history to record their names as network members.
--Boundary_(ID_BW6blz9MM1v5X/SV9qRU5A)--