Here's an interesting little piece of info and take on the issue i just came across on the topic:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/erdogan...lated_articles
I neither endorse nor reject all of the statements made in the article but find it useful to try and gain an understanding of what's playing out, it appears that the CIA is very eager to point the finger at Gulen without hiding their own relationship with him,
a possibility, if he's not involved directly, is that his network of contacts has been utilized by the CIA and that they're using him as a face since it looks bad on the flaunters of so called democracy to admit that they are the active force behind such an brazen event, meanwhile, Erdogan is now directly accusing the American government of the attempt and it appears that he's not wrong in his accusations, which include Gulen as their puppet.
And Allah knows best.
Here's a little excerpt from the article:
When US President Jimmy Carter] heard about [the 1980 coup in Turkey] he called Paul Henze, former Chief of the CIA station in Turkey who had left Ankara shortly before the coup to become a security adviser to President Carter in Washington on the Turkey desk of the CIA…Carter told Henze what the latter already knew:
‘Your people have just made a coup!’*
The President was right.* Paul Henze, the day after the coup, had triumphantly declared to his CIA colleagues in Washington: ‘Our boys have done it!”
Celik bluntly referred to Henze as “the chief architect of the September 12, 1980 coup.”* It’s not hard to see why.* From having been on the ground in the early to mid-1970s, to then becoming a coordinator in Washington while being the point person on Turkey for the National Security Council under Brzezinski, Henze was clearly instrumental.* As Gansler notes, according to Celik,“Brzezinski supported the position of Henze.* During a discussion in the National Security Council of the situation in Iran where in 1979 Khomeiny [sic] had seized power Brzezinski expressed his view that ‘for Turkey as for Brazil a military government would be the best solution.’”
While none of this should come as a surprise to anyone remotely familiar with how US intelligence operated in the Cold War, perhaps the depth of the connections between US intelligence, its NATO cousins, and the Turkish military and deep state represent something of an epiphany.* As Turkish politician and social activist Ertugrul Kurkcu wrote in*Covert Action Quarterly*in 1997:
The close ties between the Turkish, US military, and intelligence circles, along with US concerns over Turkey’s military cooperation, have been major obstacles in Turkey’s path to broader democracy. [Turkish politician and journalist Fikri] Saglar charges that US interest in Turkish affairs is not confined to official NATO relations and trade ties. He points to the notorious message by the CIA’s then-Turkey Station Chief Paul Henze in Ankara to his colleagues in Washington the day after the 1980 coup “Our boys have done it!” Henze crowed. Saglar concludes that foreign intelligence organizations including the CIA, have coopted collaborators from among the extreme-right and exploited them for their particular interests.
.....
Enter Graham Fuller, former Vice Chairman of the CIA’s National Intelligence Council, whose links to Gulen’s movement run deep.*
Fuller has gone so far as to defend Gulen on Huffington Post in recent days in an article entitled*The Gulen Movement Is Not a Cult — It’s One of the Most Encouraging Faces of Islam Today*in which he admits – he had no choice as it is well documented – that he wrote a letter in support of Gulen’s green card application to the US in 2006.* Although his rhetoric attempts to distort the nature of, and reason behind, his support for Gulen, Fuller does imply that Hizmet represents a social movement aligned with, and amenable to, US interests, one which could be used as a potent weapon in a critical NATO ally.
Fuller fails to note that he doesn’t simply have a passing connection with the Gulen movement, but that he has attended numerous Gulenist functions including large events, such as those organized by the*Turquoise Council for Americans and Eurasians, a reputed Gulenist umbrella organization run by Kemal Oksuz (a.k.a. Kevin Oksuz),*a prominent member of the Gulen network.
In addition to Fuller, infamous former CIA operative and US Ambassador to Turkey, Morton Abramowitz, also*wrote a letter backing Gulen*as he sought sanctuary in the US.* Interestingly, Abramowitz was also the co-author, along with fellow neocons Eric Edelman and Blaise Misztal, of a fiery January 2014*op-ed in the Washington Post*that all but demanded that the US topple Erdogan’s government. Yes, chin-scratchingly interesting.
So, let’s see if we got it all down.* Gulen leads a multi-billion dollar business empire and*charter/private school network*with global reach.* He is directly connected to two of the most notorious CIA operatives in the recent history of US-Turkish relations.* He has a political lobbying network whose tentacles stretch from Washington to Central Asia.* Oh, and by the way, according to former Turkish intelligence chief Osman Nuri Gundes, Gulen’s network of schools in the Central Asian nations of Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan provided the*cover for at least 130 CIA agents*in the mid to late 90s.
Now let’s add to that equation the fact that the RAND corporation, one of the most influential think tanks within US policy circles, suggested in a detailed 2004 report entitled*Civil Democratic Islam:
Partners, Resources, and Strategies*that US policy should:
“Support the modernists first, enhancing their vision of Islam over that of the*traditionalists by providing them with a broad platform to articulate and*disseminate their views. They, not the traditionalists, should be cultivated*and publicly presented as the face of contemporary Islam…Support the secularists on a case-by-case basis.”
It would seem that, more than a decade ago, and at a time when Gulen and Erdogan were still friendly, their organizations still allied, that US policy was to push Gulen and the moderate Islamist elements that he and Erdogan represented.* It seems quite likely that the falling out between Erdogan and Gulen had less to do with personal issues and egos (though that undoubtedly played a part) than it did with policy and loyalty.
.....