Document or forgery

If it is an authentic document and if it was written within the command chain, Turkey is of course facing a very serious situation. In such a case the document is proof of the continued coup aspirations in the military. If it is an authentic document but written without the order or even knowledge of the top commanders, then the situation is even worse as we may think of a group of coup plotters in the military acting separate from the chain of command. If it is a forged document, we may either think it is a product of the so-called "F-type" (that is Gülen group supporters) organization within the police force with the aim and intention of hurting the prestige of the military and thus expand the Ergenekon probe in a manner to cover some officers on duty. Or, it could be the work of the so-called Ergenekon group itself to bring within the scope of the ongoing Ergenekon trial and probe some active officers and thus convert the case into a totally unmanageable dimension. If it is a work of the F-type organization in the police force, then we may easily conclude that the already known tensions between the military and the F-type organization in the police are taking on dimensions of a severe animosity. A very nasty situation indeed. On the other hand if this "document" is forged by the outside-prison-elements of the alleged "Ergenekon organization" then perhaps even those of us who are very skeptical about the Ergenekon probe and trial and who consider all that happened as a campaign of political Islam against secular, patriotic, nationalist elements perhaps should make a reassessment.

Reading an article on the Odatv.com news portal written by Mehmet Ali Güller, a friend of mine posted me six questions outlining suspicions of the timing of the publication of the explosive "action plan" in the Taraf newspaper last week.

Questions
1- If lawyers of Ergenekon suspects were for the most part eventually turned into suspects themselves and placed behind bars by the Ergenekon prosecutors, was it logical at all for former military lawyer Serdar Öztürk, who was the advocate of Ergenekon suspect Colonel Levent Göktaş until he himself was implicated and placed behind bars, to keep such a document in his office? Did he not know that his office and residence might be searched?

2- How did it happen that Öztürk’s office was searched when he left the city for a four-day trip to Antalya? If his telephones call were being monitored, police intelligence knew that he would be traveling to Antalya. Is it normal for police to raid Öztürk’s office when he was away and find the alleged document in a drawer? Was it planted?

3- If under existing laws a document related to the prosecutors’ investigation must have been kept secret, how did it come about that it was sent to the Taraf newspaper (like the publication in Taraf newspaper of the alleged sketch of the Court of Appeals claimed to have been found at the Labor Party headquarters but which eventually was proven to be false and the Taraf newspaper was sentenced to pay compensation). Have the prosecutors launched at least an investigation into how that "document" was sent to Taraf?

4- Is it not interesting that the alleged "document" eventually turned out to be a photocopy? Is it normal to consider a photocopy an original of a document and classify it as a credible evidence of any sort?

5- At a time when secret documents are somehow being serviced out of the military command, can any commander with some brains order such an action plan against the ruling party be prepared?

6- If the action plan was prepared without order and knowledge of the top commanders, can anyone with brains provide that action plan or allow it be provided to the defense advocate of one of the suspects of the Ergenekon trial?

And, one last final question; is there a correlation between the timing of the publication in Taraf of this explosive "document" with the August promotions in the military?