Mehmet Metiner reacts to Şamil Tayyar's criticism of Uçum: 'Let our intention be to eat grapes'

The debate among AKP members that began over 'Mehmet Uçum's words' continues. While Uçum remains silent, another reaction to Tayyar came from Mehmet Metiner.

Metiner, stating, "My intention is not to defend Uçum or to criticize those who accuse him," made the following statement on his social media account under the title 'What did Mehmet Uçum say to cause this reaction?':

"First of all, let me state this: Every word that contributes to the solution of the bloody problem is valuable. No matter who that word comes from. It is not right to take a word out of context and make it a subject of polemics. It is also extremely wrong to make it a subject of interpretations independent of the intention or purpose of the person who said it.

I could not watch Mehmet Uçum. But his supportive words reflected in the press regarding the process initiated by Mr. Bahçeli are positive. When we look at those words, the actual intention and purpose are understood by themselves.

Those who want to pull the words elsewhere or create agendas suitable for their own intentions through wordplay can stir up trouble from every statement. There is no need for this. This method primarily harms its owner.

Trying to trivialize Uçum's words—which are centered on the understanding that after the terror problem is solved, the rest will be tolerated by the Turkish nation and that the essential thing is to focus on building a Turkey without terror—by reducing them to 'breakfast with Öcalan' does not benefit anyone. Just like lashing out without understanding the intent behind Mr. Bahçeli's words, 'Let Öcalan come and speak in Parliament,' trying to beat Uçum over the example he gave does not align with fairness.

Declaring that you do not agree with that statement or even reacting to it is understandable, but making Uçum the subject of accusations independent of his intention and purpose would be a truly problematic approach. It does not align with fairness.

Trying to accuse Uçum based on the definition of "Kurdish" used in his words, which emphasize that the PKK should lay down its arms and transform into a political movement, is also unjust.

It is obvious that in an impromptu speech, the phrase "Kurdish political movement" is actually an expression emphasizing the necessity of deciding on politics in the name of Kurdishness instead of terror.

Undoubtedly, I am also among those who find it wrong and dangerous to call the PKK or DEM a "Kurdish political movement." But it is enough to be unprejudiced to understand that Uçum's intention here is related to an organization claiming Kurdishness cleansing itself of terror and moving entirely into the political sphere.

My intention is not to defend Uçum or to criticize those who accuse him. I think it is very important that everyone who will contribute to this process is not sacrificed to interpretations independent of their intentions. That is why each of us must first focus on understanding.

Final word: I remind everyone that they should also be careful with the language used towards those who criticize Uçum. Let our intention be to eat grapes, not to beat the vineyard owner. The language of people from the same neighborhood and those who are fellow travelers should be careful and understanding."

WHAT DID MEHMET UÇUM SAY TO CAUSE THIS REACTION?

First of all, let me state this:

Every word that contributes to the solution of the bloody problem is valuable. No matter who that word comes from.

It is not right to take a word out of context and make it a subject of polemics.

Interpretations independent of the intention or purpose of the person who said that word…

— Mehmet Metiner (@MetinerBasin) November 15, 2024