ANKARA - Listing the questions that need to be answered in the Paris massacre, Journalist and writer Amed Dicle said: "The course of development of the incident shows that the murderer was a hitman prepared by a professional team."

 

KCK Executive Council Member Emine Kara (Evin Goyi), and Mîr Perwer (Mehmet Şirin Aydın) and Abdurrahman Kızıl from the Cultural Movement lost their lives in the attack on Ahmet Kaya Kurdish Cultural Center in Paris, the capital of France, on December 23. Murderer William M., who murdered 3 people, was first transferred to the psychiatry clinic of the police on the grounds that his "health condition is not compatible with the conditions of detention", and then he was sentenced to pre-trial detention after the condemnations.

 

Reminding the murder of Sakine Cansız, Fidan Doğan and Leyla Şaylemez in the same city on January 9, 2013, pointing to the forces behind them, journalist and writer Amed Dicle evaluated the details of the second Paris massacre to the Mesopotamia Agency. 

 

'HE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE IN POLICE CUSTODY'

 

Stating that the perpetrator of the attack, William M., was released from prison on December 12, Dicle said: "He attacked a camp where Algerian refugees were staying with a sword, and was released on probation 11 days before the massacre, after being in prison for a while. Those who were paroled in France should not go a certain distance from their residence. I don't know his house exactly, but it is kilometers away from the Ahmet Kaya Kurdish Cultural Center. Therefore, he should not come there legally, even for the purpose of carrying out an armed attack or traveling. He was supposed to be in police custody. In addition, the street where the attack took place is also under police surveillance.

 

'THE HITMAN HAD INFORMATION ABOUT THE MEETING'

 

Stating that the perpetrator, who should be under police surveillance and should not go away from his home, came to the cultural center around 11.35 a.m. on December 23, Dicle described the events as follows: “A preparatory meeting was to be held on the 10th anniversary of the 9 January massacre at 12:00 on the day of the attack. From the first day of January, a series of actions would be launched in Paris to commemorate Sakine Cansız and her friends. It was to be a 60-person meeting with a large Organizing Committee. But at the last moment, the meeting was postponed for an hour or two due to another schedule. It seems that the shooter came to be there at the meeting time. Because those who will attend a meeting at 12:00 are expected to arrive half an hour, 20 minutes in advance. The shooter has 60 spare rounds in his bag. It is understood from the number of bullets that they have news of how many people can attend the meeting. The meeting is not secret, but it is impossible for someone who has nothing to do with the association to know about it. It means that there is a professional team behind him, this information was given to him and he came with such a large amount of ammunition.”

 

'THE HITMAN KNOWS EVIN GOY'

 

Stating that three people in the cultural center were killed because the meeting was postponed, Dicle said: “Artists Mir Perwer and Abdurrahman Kızıl are standing in front of the door, and Evin Goyi hears the gunshot and comes. The hitman shoots her too. Opposite the association is the Avesta restaurant. He goes there and fire a few more bullets at Evin Goyi's head. She knows him, probably a photo of him before, etc. Then he shoots at the Avesta restaurant. The owner of this restaurant is one of the managers of the cultural center. He fires at a hairdresser belonging to a Kurd named Karizma Barber, who is 150 meters away. When the people in the hairdresser escape to the room inside, this one gets inside and while trying to change the magazines, the young people catch the towel by throwing the towel on their gun and head. Then they hand him over to the police.”

 

'KARA WAS KNOWN BY INTELLIGENCE'

 

Stating that Evin Kara was directly targeted, Dicle said: “She was a 34-year-old revolutionary, activist and politician. She represented the women's struggle in France. A female commander who had previously fought against ISIS in Rojava. She is a politician and revolutionary who was at the center of women-oriented studies during the Rojava Revolution. She is injured in the war with ISIS and comes to France to continue her treatment. He is applying for asylum in order to have a legal status for this, but unfortunately the French state rejects his request. The process continued in the upper court; therefore, it was most likely known to Turkish intelligence that she was in France. I think those who planned this massacre knew about her.”

 

'THERE IS NO AUTOPSY REPORT OF THE PERPETRATOR OF THE PREVIOUS MASSACRE'

 

Recalling the statements made by the French government that they would shed light on the incident when 3 Kurdish women were murdered, Dicle said: “It was revealed by the documents that the shooter was directly related to the MIT, that he was trained, and he was arrested. In particular, a French TV channel followed the footsteps of the murderer and went as far as the MIT building in Ankara Yenimahalle. It was already known to the French state that this massacre was carried out by the MIT, but after a while it was said that the murderer died in prison. We still don't know if he's really dead, killed or alive. He is presumed dead, but there is no autopsy report released. The case was dropped because he died, but the autopsy report was not submitted to the case. The French state made a confidentiality order and prevented some files from being presented to the court, as they were called 'state secrets'. The case is now officially dismissed. The French state did not enlighten this massacre.”

 

'THE CASE WAS FILED AS A JUDICIAL CASE'

 

Noting that the French state made the same statements in the second massacre, Dicle said: “The first massacre was not clarified, the second took place. Now, an hour after the murderer was taken into custody, the prosecution filed the massacre as a judicial case. It was not formally referred to as a terrorism file; however, what the prosecution should do first; collecting information documents. After 24 hours, he decided that he was not in good mental health, and his detention was stopped and he was admitted to a psychiatry clinic. This person does not have a report stating that he is not in good mental health, whether he was in prison before or when he was paroled for similar crimes. How did you come to this conclusion now? This is understood as an attempt to cover up or divert the event." 

 

Dicle stated that the shooter was detained and arrested after the French Democratic Kurdish Council objected to the situation in a meeting with the Minister of Justice.

 

"CONVINCING STEPS ARE NOT TAKEN"

 

Underlining that the political centers of the French state considered what happened as a massacre against the Kurds, but the attempts to make the filing and the lawsuit process seem simple caused suspicion among the Kurds, Dicle said: “The French judicial authorities do not take sufficient and convincing steps to file and clarify the massacre as a terrorist investigation. Minister gave the information that a meeting was held with the Minister of Justice with the standard answer; He said it was inappropriate for him to speak as a minister as there was an ongoing investigation and he said that 'But we share the grief of the Kurds, this is an attack on France.'"

 

FRENCH STATE SHOULD ENLIGHTEN THE MASSACRE

 

Dicle said: "The fact that the murderer was caught alive is a positive situation in terms of the safety of the case. But if the attitude of the courts is like the prosecutor's, I do not expect this case to reach a conclusion. I do not believe that the French state will shed light on its relations with Turkey until the end. The statements made at the moment are mostly for the purpose of calming the anger of the Kurds and gaining time. I am not saying that the French state was planning the massacre together with Turkey, but if there was no support within France, if its approach had not been encouraged, neither 2013 nor this massacre would have happened. If the French state really has nothing to do with this massacre and doesn't want such massacres to happen, then this case needs to be tackled to the end. Who gave this person the weapons, who brought them there, who prepared them, he needs to reveal them.”

 

Dicle said that the sit-in continues in the cultural center and the autopsy procedures are not finished yet.