Some of my collegues are saying "He didn't apologize, in fact he continued his insistance that we are being manipulated by foreign services." But I was not waiting for an apology as much as an explanation. And that was forthcoming, in the end. As far as I'm concerned, there are two basic concepts here. The first is the concept of "foreign services." The second is the concept that there would be a profit in behaving like this for the Turkish press.
Now, the Foreign Minster has already said that his words "went beyond" his original intent. The rest falls into the category of his natural right to criticize. Just as we have a right to criticize him, he has the right to air his opinions.
And so, I thank him.
But there is another point here which we must examine.
While he was editing his words, Gul criticizes us (the press) of having "ideological fixations." For example? The bringing up of either the "turban" or the "imam hatip (religious) high schools" matters before the people of the country every two months. If that is in fact the case, then we must all think about this: Should we try to balance out behavior which we think stems from certain ideological fixations with the exact opposite ideological fixations? I don't think so. There is clearly a problem though. Who exactly is going to decide what an ideological fixation really is?