Nearing the end of the Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu investigation by Aydoğan Vatandaş
Exactly three years have passed since the alleged assassination of Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu.
I say “assassination” since it appears the entire nation is convinced that this is what in fact happened. The only real question, at least according to the public, we have here is why would Yazıcıoğlu’s death be ordered.
We can examine the general tableau that has emerged before us to analyze who the most suspicious people are in the alleged assassination. As many people already know from the emails and conversations that took place between the General Staff and the State Audit Institution (DDK) uncovered in the Ergenekon case, there is no mention of the alleged breakdown in radar function throughout the entire eastern region of the country at the time Yazıcıoğlu’s helicopter went down, which was sometime between 15:03:02-15:07:40.
Isn’t it a coincidence that the breakdown in radar took place right around the same time the helicopter accident took place?
Information about how an airplane can bring down a helicopter when the former passes very close to the latter is quite basic; in fact, this information is provided in the Turkish Air Forces (THK) lesson books. This being the situation, the General Staff has already maintained firmly that there were no aircraft belonging to the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) anywhere near said helicopter at the time it fell.
In the end though, the truth came out:
A document addressed to the Malatya Prosecutor’s Office on May 27, 2011, states it is accepted that there were in fact two F16 fighter jets and an F4 bomber near the scene of the accident at 14:59:47, and at a distance of 28.5 kilometers.
At first, the DDK wanted to officially mislead the public on this front. But when the information emerged, it was quite interesting to observe that the national agenda suddenly changed radically through a series of different events in order to distract the public from following the details of the case.
Suspicions were further raised when the said three planes had routes which remained mysterious. And then of course there was also the incompatibility between the military radar images sent to the Malatya Prosecutor’s Office and the civilian radar images on hand. The differences between these images raised suspicions further.
The fact that GPS devices located on board the helicopter were stolen, and that it was stated that these devices were stolen as “souvenirs,” also did nothing to quell suspicions. Nor did the fact that the first autopsy done on the victims did not uncover CO2 at first, but then traces of CO2 turned up on the second autopsy.
And so the information provided by the General Staff in connection with this topic, not to mention the authenticity of the documents provided by authorities, has become very clearly a subject of serious debate.
But now, hold on tight
According to things I have heard, the airplanes mentioned previously turn out to have been closer than the aforementioned 28.5 kilometers. In meetings I recently had in Ankara, there were allegations that in fact this proximity was closer to 7 kilometers than 28.5 kilometers. So it seems quite likely that this was the topic for the meetings that took place a few months ago between President Abdullah Gül and Yazıcıoğlu’s widow, as well as a few top-ranking Grand Unity Party (BBP) leaders.
And from meetings I had last week with a few retired Air Force officers, I learned about how airplanes can bring down helicopters by blowing them down with wind. In which case the key point of the entire investigation becomes finding out which officers were flying the said airplanes, and who gave them the orders they received.
Intentionally bringing down the helicopter and then trying to keep the truth hidden was most certainly an “organized” activity, as can be seen with the following:
A) The difficult feat of bringing down a helicopter by way of flying a plane close to it.
B) The removal of GPS devices from the helicopter by certain military personnel who were allegedly looking for “souvenirs.”
C) Intentional neglect in search and rescue operations.
D) The fact that the ELT model shown in a photograph of the helicopter does not match the ELT model pictured in a photograph taken of the helicopter after the accident.
Again, the question of “why” comes to mind.
There are three scenarios being debated these days by the public.
1. Yazıcıoğlu was a very well-known name within the framework of the Ergenekon investigation, and was also firmly placed in opposition to Ergenekon.
2. The allegation that sometime before the 1980s Yazıcıoğlu gave orders calling for the brother of an Air Force general to be killed.
3. The possibility that Yazıcıoğlu had obtained some new information and documents in relation to the Gospel of Barnabas (Barnabas İncili), a book depicting the life of Jesus, in relation to the fact that the topic might be made into a film.