A theme that has been discussed since the beginning is now more frequently voiced. Pro-Ergenekon actors think that they will get away from this by hiding behind Atatürk. They want to be like those who try to prevent their illegally built houses from being demolished. When he was arrested, Sinan Aygün declared his offense to be "loving Atatürk." When 2.5 million euros were found in his house, he had to respond to the questions asking why the notes found in his house do not bear Atatürk's photo. Lt. Ali Ç., who was arrested in the first wave of operations, said he was accused of being loyal to Mustafa Kemal. Ergün Poyraz has no problem with putting himself in Atatürk's shoes at the hearings.
They wanted to make the last veteran, Mustafa Şekiğ Birgöl, who died recently, part of their abuse. Ercan Akyol from Milliyet, in his caricature, said, "They said goodbye to the old one, but arrested the new." The marginal Internet sites assert that Mustafa Kemal's soldiers are being prosecuted. Republican People's Party (CHP) members, Ergenekon's voluntary advocates, even ask, "Is the No. 1 suspect Atatürk?"
Trying to get away from the trials by implying similarity between the defendants and Atatürk is an old trick. It recalls the famous protagonist, Avanak Anvi, created by Oğuz Aral, who started reciting the national anthem when he concluded he would be beaten. They keep doing the same while suggesting similarities between Atatürk and his legacy and a clandestine organization under trial. Normally, those who make this analogy should be prosecuted under the law protecting Atatürk.
Some marginal Web sites and ultranationalist circles prefer to ignore this. The democratic media is one of the biggest tools to prevent the dilution of the Ergenekon investigation. While some try to render the investigation inconclusive, the democratic media pays attention to this great opportunity for a thorough cleanup. The voluntary advocates of Ergenekon are uneasy with this; therefore, they resort to groundless allegations. They allege that a figurative picture in Zaman sketched Atatürk as one of the members of Ergenekon. To do something like this, Zaman must be stupid, considering that it has been closely following the Ergenekon case.
While the pro-Ergenekon actors try to ensure that they are equalized with Atatürk, this is something that those who see this as a great opportunity would never do. Besides, the same picture was simultaneously used by more than 20 TV stations and papers. Some of these state that the person in the sketch was defendant journalist Vedat Yenerer. I leave the decision for the possibility that such a great number of people are Atatürk's adversaries to the people.
Meanwhile, M.A., a military doctor, sends offensive messages using the e-mail of the private clinic where he works. When you enter the clinic's Web site, a person in uniform welcomes you. We don't know whether the General Staff prompted such an assignment or if he assumes the role of a voluntary advocate of Ergenekon. Let me respond to M.A. and those who commit the same acts by quoting the Hürriyet daily's editor-in-chief, Ertuğrul Özkök: "Doğaner Gönen was trying to explain to Yalçın Bayer over the phone that this was a ridiculous allegation and that the person in the picture was nothing like Atatürk. I got involved in the discussion. It was really a nonsense allegation." (Hürriyet, Oct. 28, 2008).
