… understand the legal process that is being undertaken.

Read the article again, carefully.  It does not say that.  It says that neither of the EU officials quoted understand the legal process that is not being undertaken.

Lagendijk erroneously said the Turkish judiciary has decided the choice of the majority of Turks is wrong– the Turkish judiciary has said no such thing. 

Instead, all the Turkish judges have indicated today by their vote is that there is sufficient evidence in the indictment to warrant an investigation.

Lagendijk incorrectly presumes there has been a verdict against the AKP.  Can you understand the difference? 

"No wonder you quote politicians like Zhirinovsky …"

Do you know what sarcasm is?  Reread the last paragraph and think of the word "sarcasm".  See if that doesn’t help.

P.S. – Her name is Tansu, not Tancu.

………………………………………….

Despite the multitude of lawsuits filed against U.S. Presidents and their administrations, it seems no one is concerned about the demise of democracy in the U.S.  Pity the Americans (as their own government continues to spy on them) …

I agree that Ergenekon is more like “spoiled Gladio” What ever its origins may heve been it became Mafia like organization.

You are right that AKP case is not over yet but we have seen the evidence in the indictment. (some 167 pages I think)
BUT
Ergenekon indictment is not out yet so “It is too early” to talk about Ilhan Selcuk. Once I see the indictment I may agree or disagree with you.
I agree with you that Ilhan Secuk is an intellectual but I hope you will not call Veli Kucuk and Perincek intellectuals

The second message intended is that it is premature and arrogant to presume the Turkish judiciary will not follow the law.  The threshold level for evidence to accept an indictment are much much lower than the burden of proof required to establish a given verdict.

This means that an indictment need not set forth all or the best evidence known to a prosecutor, just enough evidence to prove that there is cause to investigate further.

What does that mean? 

That means, once again, it is premature to pass judgment on the indictment and the quality of the evidence–because the public does not yet know what all of the evidence is.

Last, in response to Kel, I appreciate and understand your concern.  Verdicts of conviction should not be based on flimsy or evidence lacking credibility.

However, let’s not forget that Ilhan Selcuk was just detained for being a "Thought Leader" of some vague "plot" among 50 or so people who somehow, despite their numbers, managed to keep their conspiracy a very deep dark secret.

And, has anyone noticed that the entire Ergenekon scenario described is eerily similar to what is known as the "left-behinds" of Gladio, which was a secret and authorized NATO operation?— that as far as I know, ceased operating after the iron curtain fell.

To use your words Kel, the Ergenekon accusations smell really bad, their timing is bad, the manner in which the government is "executing" its investigation is exaggerated, the story is unoriginal, the people arrested are, on an intellectual level, the most dangerous opponents of religious fundamentalism—it smells really really bad.

I like your suggestion of protection both from each other.
I do not know if this is doable but I like it.
Because religion in its essanse an Idea where government is an organization with lots of power. Religion’s power is its ability to effect hearts. Are there corrupt religious people? of course just like there are corrupt goverment people.

I gues we must keep working at it.