"It's never mentioned, for example, that his organization in Turkey runs "houses of light" (isik evleri) which serve..."

And here is the problem that I personally have, it could be that the whole organisation is like Scientology, Opus Dei or they spend their evenings with prosecuting chickens, but regarding the coup the world still need to see some solid evidence. Where is the proof and preferably something that has more value than Erdogan's word for it.

It doesn't matter if somebody is a not a nice person. When there isn't any evidence of a crime you don't prosecute them, simple as that. Also don't tell me that of all that is going on after the coup, that these are the results of proper investigations or a good functioning justice system.

Meanwhile in this European country we are confronted by Turkish (even third generation) people that threatening other Turkish people, arson or destruction against buildings of people they clearly don't like and that mainly because some egomaniac in a country far away is throwing blind accusations like there is no tomorrow.

We are even at the point that the Turkish embassy is calling all people to report anybody who "insults" Erdogan, because the world clearly needs more LOTR comparisons or poems. Hell, this week the president of this region needed to make the comparison with nazi's because that was the last time we were confronted with a foreign power trying to meddle in our local affairs. In the end the ambassador needed to apologize, but we are seeing more and more of those incidents.

> the world still need to see some solid evidence

I agree completely with your sentiment regarding conviction without proof, but want to comment on this thought one part for a second, in isolation from the rest of the discussion. First of all, that the world doesn't see evidence on gulen's shady dealings or extreme islamist tendencies at all is a measure of the world's own ignorance. I don't mean this in an accusatory way - it's not your fault.

Outside observers, especially those who do not understand Turkish, are excluded from huge swathes of news, discussion, court cases and information. What you're getting is the gist. It's second hand information at best, and the foreign media often gets it wrong, misses historic context, or glosses over the nuances.

Just like all the people here (and in western news organizations) who didn't know Gulen existed up until very recently - an deficiency in knowledge so huge that it should scare you away (and perhaps disqualify you) from holding a strong opinion on Turkish politics immediately.

So when outsiders ask for "evidence" - really they're asking for a New York Times / Economist / Wall Street Journal / Foreign Policy op-ed. Because that's considered a respectable news organization, but Turkish sources aren't considered respectable, never mind that they probably share most of their sources on Turkish news.

So, demands for "solid evidence" in this sense are a measure of privilege that's so monumental that people don't even realize they're subject to it.

So when I try to make an argument with someone who isn't from Turkey, the best I can do is point to sources like these, which all have surface-level milquetoast reports on gulen, painting him a "reclusive cleric", an islamic scholar and "supporter of interfaith dialogue" - all true to some degree, but definitely not the whole story.

---

As a more concrete example, let's look at the progression of Gulen profiles in the nyt over the years:

2000 http://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/25/world/turkey-assails-a-rev... 2008 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/world/asia/04islam.html 2010 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/us/12iht-gulen.html 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/world/middleeast/turkey-fe... 2016 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/17/us/fethullah-gulen-turkey-... 2016 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/world/europe/fethullah-gul...

It's amazing to see how the language and the detail in the account of his activities change across the years. The 2000 article gets the part about the prosecution, but misses the point on Gulen completely. Nor a single bad thing about him. Anyway, recently, they gave the soapbox to gulen himself twice:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/04/opinion/fethullah-gulen-tu... http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/opinion/fethullah-gulen-i-...

Luckily, they also gave a smaller soapbox to Mustafa Akyol, a Turkish journalist, who presents many great counterarguments:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/opinion/who-was-behind-the...

Again, I don't think this is some conspiracy, but just ignorance. The 2000 article was ignorant of basic, common knowledge in Turkish politics. The more recent ones are less ignorant.

---

Of course this is changing: for example here's a 2014 article from the Carnegie Endowment, which points fingers to shady activities but doesn't make accusations about islamism: http://carnegieendowment.org/2014/02/04/g-len-movement-and-t...

Turkish sources are also starting to publish english language news - here's an analysis of the Gulen movement through wikileaks cables:

http://www.dailysabah.com/politics/2014/04/04/cia-fbi-divide...

Here are some of the actual cables - I hope these are considered reliable to draw your own conclusions from:

https://www.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/05ISTANBUL1336_a.html https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09ASHGABAT491_a.html

See Centicosm's comment here for another well researched article:

http://www.meforum.org/2045/fethullah-gulens-grand-ambition

It also comes from the Middle East Forum which is a conservative think tank, so take that as you will. But this is what I mean - they have a huge incentive to badmouth islam, so they actually bother to engage in research. Impressively, most of the sources on the bottom are Turkish language sources.

---

Anyway, my point isn't about gulen, but the attitude and the cultural notion that facts exist when they exist in the western media, and anything else is unreliable conspiracy theories and bunk. And this coming from people who barely knew Gulen - a central figure in Turkish politics - a few months ago.

Yes, things do suck in Turkey, and are nonfunctional in many ways. Many things are wrong, many sources are unreliable and corrupt, but we're not completely stupid either, and the sneering sense of superiority I so often encounter is counterproductive, surprising and tiring.

Someone on reddit told me the Gulen movement was comparable to Scientology in the eyes of the Turks. I didn't have more details, your comment is clearer. Thanks.

What do you think about press being cleaned ? in the west it's seen negatively obviously, but is there other details that may explain, like in the Gulen movement case, the decision ?

Is Erdogan feeding the people populist lies in order to rally them ? Some people have said he's starting to look like Germany pre WW2 politic style.

> Gulen movement was comparable to Scientology

Well, yeah - at least in the eyes of my social circle, but I doubt that he'd gather so much influence if everyone thought the same.

> What do you think about press being cleaned ? in the west it's seen negatively obviously, but is there other details that may explain, like in the Gulen movement case, the decision ?

Well, I have very mixed feelings.

Someone made a point that a lot more people were complicit in the nazi atrocities than were indicted in the Nuremberg trials, and that makes sense. So the ones directly involved with the coup plot, yes, absolutely prosecute and punish them swiftly. The rest is trickier.

Obviously Gulen and his supporters need to be dealt with. But how can we be sure that the trials will be fair and equitable, and not a mockery of the justice system, like the Sledgehammer case that Erdogan participated in (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sledgehammer_(coup_plan) )? How does a government prosecute thousands upon thousands when its courts and prosecutors can barely hold under the current case load?

How can we ensure that the tens of thousands accused are actually guilty? Of course a trial is done to test exactly this, but there is no right to a speedy trial in Turkey, and people routinely die in detention waiting for their court date. How many are genuinely suspected to be guilty rather than merely detractors who are being conveniently removed? They've done it before, and they'll do it again. This makes me extremely uncomfortable, because who's next?

Especially with the press, I think it's important to preserve free and unrestricted speech. But it's also true that that ship long sailed under Erdogan, when news organizations would get fiscally investigated if they dissented loudly. So given that I don't think it'll improve, should the Gulenist reporters go to jail? Perhaps - if their only crime is to write articles supporting backwards views, then probably not. I'd rather them ousted and judged in the court of public opinion.

So, mixed feelings and no good answers.

> Is Erdogan feeding the people populist lies in order to rally them ?

That's the kicker - he doesn't have to. This situation benefits him greatly, and fell conveniently on his lap. Some people of course accuse him of organizing the coup as a false flag, but I think that's too much of a conspiracy. All he'd have to do would be to notice it a tiny bit in advance, prepare for it, and allow it to happen. Or even just get lucky enough to narrowly escape, but then make use of the situation fully.

So if I understand correctly, most the people arrested (teachers, journalists, police, etc) were Gulen activists or supporters ? Not just neutral or opposing the current governement ?

> allow it to happen

Yeah passively playing the victim seems to be more efficient.

> So if I understand correctly, most the people arrested (teachers, journalists, police, etc) were Gulen activists or supporters ? Not just neutral or opposing the current governement ?

Well, it's unclear. Of course the Erdogan government claims they are, but we don't know - there could be a lot of innocent people in there too. And that's exactly the issue and source of contention.

Alright thanks a lot. Not easy to understand what happens in country I don't hear often about.

To further this point, this is a nice US-based analysis from the Middle East Quarterly in 2009 of Gulen and presumably the folks who participated in the coup seeing as the Kremelists (secularists) had already been removed by him). http://www.meforum.org/2045/fethullah-gulens-grand-ambition. It sounds like secular proponents of democracy in Turkey are up the proverbial creek no matter who prevailed.

Thanks for adding some sanity to the discussion.