Of course, your "evidence" is laughable. One is a student thesis about USA's involvement in coups during the Cold War (i.e. no relevance to your claim). Why did you bother using this?
The second is a newspaper article that describes how the prosecutor has charged a "CIA agent" with involvement in the coup. The evidence presented is that (1) a group of foreigners met in Büyükada and (2) he left the country four days after the coup and (3) he was (gasp!) at a HDP press conference (4) he wrote about Kurdish issues. How is this even remotely compelling to anyone?
Also, you claimed Mossad was involved but not a single mention of them anywhere
Look ... I am familiar with Turkey and I know all the ridiculous things that people believe in that country. This is extraordinaruly weak even by those low standards.
Of course, your "evidence" is laughable. One is a student thesis about USA's involvement in coups during the Cold War (i.e. no relevance to your claim). Why did you bother using this?
The second is a newspaper article that describes how the prosecutor has charged a "CIA agent" with involvement in the coup. The evidence presented is that (1) a group of foreigners met in Büyükada and (2) he left the country four days after the coup and (3) he was (gasp!) at a HDP press conference (4) he wrote about Kurdish issues. How is this even remotely compelling to anyone?
Also, you claimed Mossad was involved but not a single mention of them anywhere
Look ... I am familiar with Turkey and I know all the ridiculous things that people believe in that country. This is extraordinaruly weak even by those low standards.