How many "individuals" linked to FETÖ prove Gülen's contact on 15 July? The UK Parliament's 15 July Report

A 79-page report titled Pressure or Healing? Time for a Decision for Turkey: MPs Support a Positive British Role has been published, prepared by the UK Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee. The report, which addresses Turkey's strategic importance, commends the fight against DAESH and Turkey's refugee policy.

On the other hand, it is striking that the report, which uses positive language based on the thesis that relations with Turkey should generally be developed, adopts a rather skeptical tone on the July 15 Coup Attempt.

Actually, even more striking than this is the difference between the content of the report that had leaked to the public earlier and the content that emerged after the report was published. Hours before the report was published, Al Jazeera announced on both its English and Arabic sites that the report would be published and that its content would stress FETÖ's connection to the coup. But hours later, Al Jazeera seems to have realized there was an inconsistency between the released content and its story, and made an amendment to its report.

However, the sources I could reach regarding the background of the story say that the channel was certain of its reporting on the content of the report, and that, being privy to the preparation stage, the content of the report was changed toward the end.

The question that should be asked at precisely this point is perhaps what kind of lobbying activity or connections this change may have resulted from. But frankly we are not very curious. After looking at the attitude of the German Intelligence Organization, which we have had to confirm if not its collaboration with FETÖ then its idiocy, the news that British authorities were taking another approach had, to tell the truth, surprised us.

Still, the report, which states that the coup attempt targeted Turkey's democracy, says that the support Britain gave Turkey in the face of July 15 was appropriate.

Although we do not see or know what kind of support Britain gave Turkey on July 15, the British are of the opinion that they gave support.

Since it fits the place exactly, there is no harm in putting the scene here:

As they say, a cheese ship doesn't sail on words alone, exactly that.

The views put forward on FETÖ, however, seem like proof that Britain, our ally which thinks it supported Turkey in the face of July 15, has not truly understood July 15, or perhaps more accurately did not want to understand it. For the report states that the claims voiced by Turkey that the Fethullahist Terrorist Organization (FETÖ) was behind the coup attempt could not be supported with qualified evidence.

According to the report, the participation of Fethullahist individuals in this coup attempt does not mean that the coup attempt was carried out by this organization. Of course, the basic question that inevitably comes to mind right away is this:

How many "individuals" identified as linked to FETÖ would convince the British that Gülen or the Gülenists were behind the event?

The interesting side of the matter is that, after cautious statements are recorded about FETÖ, it is also stated that the British Foreign Office believes what Turkey has reported about the relationship between FETÖ and the coup attempt, but that there is not sufficient information about FETÖ. That is,

on the one hand it is said "we believe you," while on the other it is said there is no evidence. Thus a middle-of-the-road language that meets the expectations of both sides is struck.

The report is advisory in nature to the British government and is not a determining document. Nevertheless, it is important in that it expresses the British Parliament's approach to what is happening in Turkey.

On July 15 in Turkey, an extremely powerful attack was carried out against the democratic regime. Hundreds of people were killed by coup-plotting terrorists while defending democratic values and their future, and thousands more were wounded. The Grand National Assembly, the Presidential Complex and the Special Operations Department were bombed by fighter jets registered in NATO's inventory that took off from bases controlled by terrorists.

The available evidence shows that this coup attempt was organized by soldiers known to be FETÖ members and that FETÖ was in the chain of command. There is a great deal of evidence at hand to confirm this. In addition,

even some developments reflected in the media and confirmed by the government are sufficient to understand that FETÖ was at the center of this attempt.

For example, a FETÖ-affiliated academic (Adil Öksüz), a lecturer at the Faculty of Divinity at Sakarya University, was at the Akıncılar Air Base, the epicenter of the coup, on the night of the coup and was later captured.

It later emerged that this person was FETÖ's man in charge of the Air Force. Moreover, after the failure of the coup attempt, a great many officers who became confessors say they were FETÖ members and that they received orders for the coup attempt from their superiors within the FETÖ structure.

On the coup night, the only civilian who was with the soldiers who seized the state television channel and read the pirate declaration, tasked with directing the broadcasts and providing technical support to them, Onur Demircan, is also a FETÖ member.

That is, the soldiers who attempted the coup, to have support, could find at best a FETÖ member (we must call this a coincidence, if we speak in the report's language). Examples can be multiplied.

Therefore, no one doubts that FETÖ held a central position in this coup attempt.

But this does not point to the naive position that we believe FETÖ alone carried out this coup attempt.

Both the Turkish people and the Turkish government are aware that this treacherous coup attempt was concocted by a consortium.

The instigator is beyond doubt, since the crime was caught in the act. Who the instigators are, we of course reason about that too.

For example, it is known where the fighter jets that bombed the Assembly and the Presidential Complex and closed Istanbul's airspace to traffic had their refueling done, from which tanker aircraft they took off. We can already distinguish the tongs from the hand that holds the tongs. But

this does not require ignoring that this instigator was caught red-handed. Otherwise there remains no reason not to start thinking that those who try to cover up the crime are the instigators.

For this reason, just like the head of the German intelligence service BND, those who prepare reports for the British Parliament would do well to be careful as well.

Is Britain, which has a legendary intelligence organization like M16, really naive like German intelligence, or is it trying to make us believe it is naive? And if so, why, one wonders?