In Turkey, the biggest political discussion was about a document, allegedly prepared by the Operational Planning division of the Turkish Army. The document was telling about a plan to finish off the AKP government and the Gulen movement.
As Burak Bekdil writes, "when there is a 'bombshell' with an unknown fate, we are often dragged into the queue of commentators not necessarily because the bombshell is mature enough to comment on, but precisely because it is a bombshell and not commenting on it would be tantamount to 'missing the agenda.' The latest allegations of a coup attempt within the ranks of the armed forces, based on a document whose authenticity was still a mystery by the time this column was written, is a powerful example."
The keyword is authenticity here.
At first glance, the story of the Taraf, a pro-government newspaper, was really a bombshell.
However, when you start to ask questions, you see that this story should not have been published anyway.
I strongly believe in documentary journalism. I followed up the expenses row in Britain by appreciating the Daily Telegraph. All those bills and receipts that they published have changed the course of the British politics, without leaving any question mark behind.
The Taraf journalism is something different. First of all, Taraf is neither an independent nor a reliable source, because it is a party in today's politics in Turkey. This newspaper is closely affiliated with the Gulen movement, which is the subject of the latest story. Moreover, Taraf obviously gets most of the journalism material from the Gulenist officers in the police force. Whether authentic or not, the latest document could have been supplied in this way.
Nevertheless, if the story could be so strong that leaves no question marks behind, the link between Taraf and the Gulent movement could be ignored. Unfortunately, that is not the case.
Taraf has printed a photocopy of the army document. You can't criminally test the authenticity of a document by using its Xerox. You can seamlessly copy and paste any signature on a photocopy. Moreover, the content of the document (vocabulary, abbreviations, etc. that were used) hints that it was not written by the military staff. It sounds more like it was written by a teenager.
Taraf states that the original version of the document is still in the archives of the police force. So this newspaper knows something that even the Ergenekon prosecutors don't know!
If they don't have the original version, then why the hell did they publish this dubious photocopy, risking to trigger a fight between the state bodies? Does Taraf have a secret agenda or is it a tool for certain parties with a secret agenda?
We'll see if they will provide the original document, too. But in any case, to publish this story in its current form was either a journalistic blunder or a sinister provocation.
