Friday, March 30, 2007
Still Going Strong
To those who have been reading this blog, keep the faith. This is a period of relative silence, but that doesn't mean things might not be happening behind the scenes. All good things come to those who wait...
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Petition for open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case & SSP
This post will stay on top. Scroll down for new posts. Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126 - demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege. (Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498)
The Petition:
-------------------------------------
To: The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
A Petition to require public hearings by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform into confirmed reports by FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds of wrongdoing, criminal activities, cover-ups against the security and interests of the United States and its citizenry, and the erroneous use of the State Secrets Privilege to shut down all court proceedings in her case.
In March 2002 the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General (DOJ-IG) began its investigation of Ms. Edmonds’ reports.
In June 2002, in at least two unclassified Senate briefings, FBI officials confirmed the validity of Ms. Edmonds reports; however, in May 2004 Attorney General Ashcroft retroactively classified information from these briefings and gagged the Congress, preventing further investigation.
In October 2002 Attorney General Ashcroft invoked the ‘State Secrets Privilege’ to block all court proceedings in Edmonds’ case.
In July 2004 the DOJ-IG investigation into Edmonds' dismissal was completed but was entirely classified.
In January 2005 the DOJ-IG released an unclassified summary report on Edmonds’ case which concluded that Edmonds was fired for reporting serious security breaches and misconduct in the agency's translation program, and that many of her allegations were supported by other witnesses and documents.
The issues that were reported by Ms. Edmonds include:
Edmonds filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the Department of Justice, but the government successfully argued that the state secrets privilege was an absolute bar to her suit going forward. She was even barred from the courtroom during the argument of her appeal! The Supreme Court declined to review the case. The government's invocation of the state secrets privilege in a motion to dismiss her case contradicts the core idea of judicial review and essentially allows the Executive Branch to dictate to the federal courts what cases they can and can’t hear.
Invoking the State Secrets Privilege is a tactic frequently used by the Executive Branch to stop potentially embarrassing lawsuits against the government. Many of these suits are brought by government employees, such as Ms. Edmonds, who allege fraud, mismanagement, or other unlawful conduct, and the state secrets privilege has successfully been invoked by the government to silence them. The state secrets provision has been used too frequently and with too little public protection.
Given the seriousness of Ms. Edmonds’ reports and in the best interests of the security of the country, it is incumbent upon the Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities and authority as representatives of the people of the United States, therefore:
We, the undersigned, now call upon the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in Congress to hold public hearings into the case of FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, and the erroneous use of the State Secrets Privilege to shut down all court proceedings in her case.
-------------------------------------
See here for the full list of signatories including 30 liberal, libertarian and conservative groups including the American Civil Liberties Union, Citizen Outreach, OMB Watch, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Government Accountability Project, Electronic Freedom Foundation, and the National Coalition Against the Censorship
Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman and Conyers demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege.
Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498
Update: Emailers have suggested that those calling Waxman's office should ask for Michelle Ash (Michelle.Ash@mail.house.gov) & David Rapallo. Those calling Conyers' office should ask for Elliot Mintzberg.
Waxman Contact Details:
In Washington, D.C.
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
In Los Angeles
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)
Conyers Contact Details:
Email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
You can also contact two senators who have previously showed support for Sibel.
Senator Grassley: ph: 202.224.3744 Full contact details here
Senator Leahy: ph: (202) 224-4242 senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov Full contact details here
NB: If you click on the envelope just below here, on the right, next to the word 'Comments' you can email this entire petition to anyone, including John Conyers at John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
(NB - this post has been 'post-dated' to keep it on top. Originally posted March 7th)
The Petition:
-------------------------------------
To: The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
A Petition to require public hearings by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform into confirmed reports by FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds of wrongdoing, criminal activities, cover-ups against the security and interests of the United States and its citizenry, and the erroneous use of the State Secrets Privilege to shut down all court proceedings in her case.
In March 2002 the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General (DOJ-IG) began its investigation of Ms. Edmonds’ reports.
In June 2002, in at least two unclassified Senate briefings, FBI officials confirmed the validity of Ms. Edmonds reports; however, in May 2004 Attorney General Ashcroft retroactively classified information from these briefings and gagged the Congress, preventing further investigation.
In October 2002 Attorney General Ashcroft invoked the ‘State Secrets Privilege’ to block all court proceedings in Edmonds’ case.
In July 2004 the DOJ-IG investigation into Edmonds' dismissal was completed but was entirely classified.
In January 2005 the DOJ-IG released an unclassified summary report on Edmonds’ case which concluded that Edmonds was fired for reporting serious security breaches and misconduct in the agency's translation program, and that many of her allegations were supported by other witnesses and documents.
The issues that were reported by Ms. Edmonds include:
• Cases of espionage activities within the FBI, DOD, and the Department of State
• Cases of cover-up of information and leads pre and post 9/11, under the excuse of protecting certain diplomatic relations
• Cases of intentional blocking and mistranslation of crucial intelligence by FBI translators and management
• Cases of foreign entities bribing certain government officials and elected representatives
Edmonds filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the Department of Justice, but the government successfully argued that the state secrets privilege was an absolute bar to her suit going forward. She was even barred from the courtroom during the argument of her appeal! The Supreme Court declined to review the case. The government's invocation of the state secrets privilege in a motion to dismiss her case contradicts the core idea of judicial review and essentially allows the Executive Branch to dictate to the federal courts what cases they can and can’t hear.
Invoking the State Secrets Privilege is a tactic frequently used by the Executive Branch to stop potentially embarrassing lawsuits against the government. Many of these suits are brought by government employees, such as Ms. Edmonds, who allege fraud, mismanagement, or other unlawful conduct, and the state secrets privilege has successfully been invoked by the government to silence them. The state secrets provision has been used too frequently and with too little public protection.
Given the seriousness of Ms. Edmonds’ reports and in the best interests of the security of the country, it is incumbent upon the Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities and authority as representatives of the people of the United States, therefore:
We, the undersigned, now call upon the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in Congress to hold public hearings into the case of FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, and the erroneous use of the State Secrets Privilege to shut down all court proceedings in her case.
-------------------------------------
See here for the full list of signatories including 30 liberal, libertarian and conservative groups including the American Civil Liberties Union, Citizen Outreach, OMB Watch, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Government Accountability Project, Electronic Freedom Foundation, and the National Coalition Against the Censorship
Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman and Conyers demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege.
Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498
Update: Emailers have suggested that those calling Waxman's office should ask for Michelle Ash (Michelle.Ash@mail.house.gov) & David Rapallo. Those calling Conyers' office should ask for Elliot Mintzberg.
Waxman Contact Details:
In Washington, D.C.
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
In Los Angeles
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)
Conyers Contact Details:
Email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
| 2426 Rayburn Building | 2615 W. Jefferson |
|
You can also contact two senators who have previously showed support for Sibel.
Senator Grassley: ph: 202.224.3744 Full contact details here
Senator Leahy: ph: (202) 224-4242 senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov Full contact details here
NB: If you click on the envelope just below here, on the right, next to the word 'Comments' you can email this entire petition to anyone, including John Conyers at John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
(NB - this post has been 'post-dated' to keep it on top. Originally posted March 7th)
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
(I'm not going to be able to post for a couple of weeks. My buddy Miguel will publish any relevant information here)
Saturday, March 24, 2007
no news
Here's just a quick message to let you know that we haven't heard anything from Waxman's office, and they were unusually reticent to return phone calls.
I'm not sure what it means.
Will keep you posted.
I'm not sure what it means.
Will keep you posted.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Goyette interview
The audio of my interview with Charles Goyette from today is available for download here (15 minutes)
Sibel Edmonds: Last chance to put Perle, Feith & Hastert in orange jumpsuits
Today is the final day of our Let Sibel Edmonds Speak campaign where we have been asking people to call Henry Waxman's office (202-225-3976, Capitol switchboard 800-828-0498) to demand *public* hearings into the case of former FBI translator and whistleblower, Sibel Edmonds.
Sibel guarantees that if we have public hearings, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Marc Grossman, and Dennis Hastert will go to prison for a long time. If any of that appeals to you, for any reason, call Waxman today. Please.
If you want some more background on the case, please see lukery.dailykos.com - particularly "What the heck is Sibel Edmonds' Case about? And why should I care?"
We've been getting positive feedback from Waxman's office, and we just need to drive the final nail into the coffin today.
Today's fresh content is an interview that Sibel and I did with Peter B Collins on Monday evening. (audio)
Here's the interview, I appear to have missed the start.
-----------------------
Peter: ... Your voice has been ruthlessly suppressed at a time when we really need to hear the truth about what you know and how you were treated when you attempted to blow the whistle at the FBI.
Sibel: Peter, as you know, the ACLU declared me as the most gagged American citizen in the US history. They invoked the State Secrets Privilege twice in my case, they have issued various gag orders, they even ordered a gag order in May 2004 on Congress - this is the Department of Justice, first under then-Attorney General Ashcroft, and then later by Alberto Gonzales. Basically, these gag orders and the State Secrets Privilege, deprive you of your 1st amendment right, your 4th amendment right, and your 5th amendment right - and they aren't doing this to some suspected terrorist, or what they call foreign terrorists, they're doing it to an American citizen who reported serious, confirmed wrongdoing through the appropriate channels, by the way. As you know the DoJ's IG's office issued a report 18 months ago that vindicated my report, and they basically said that my allegations were confirmed by other witnesses, evidence and documents, etc. Also, we had two senators, bi-partisan, Senators Grassley and Leahy who publicly confirmed my case and my report, and this was the statement by Senator Grassley, who said: 'Even the FBI management confirmed her report.' So you're not looking, as I said, with these phony, quasi cases that they usually refer to as 'We only do this to suspects, terrorists, etc' - this is what they're doing inside our country, this is what they're doing to an American citizen, and this is what they are getting away with - both in court, and up to this point, in Congress. I have been fighting to reverse this, because what they're doing is not constitutional, it's against the Bill of Rights - plus, covering up these reports absolutely damages our national security. So, 30-plus organizations came together, including the ACLU, POGO, GAP, National Coalition Against Censorship, Liberty Coalition, its transpartisan, you have 30-plus organizations involving civil liberties issues and whistleblower issues and privacy issues, and they put together this joint petition that they served Chairman Waxman of the House government Reform Committee two weeks ago. This petition says 'Chairman Waxman, it's been five years, and there are other witnesses, other FBI witnesses who want to testify in this case, because this case involves some criminal activities by certain people in our own government! We are not only talking about terrorist activities here and we want you to have open public hearings on this case' So we served the committee, we served Chairman Waxman, and all these organizations put out press releases saying 'this is what we did' - and we have had 15-20 thousand American citizens who have signed the petition, we've had thousands of people who have called, and we're still asking them to call - basically urging the committee and as the name of the committee suggests - this is the government Reform Committee - and these wrongdoings have occurred within our government agencies, by our government officials, and they have the power - Chairman Waxman has been great, before they became the majority, they actually, the committee and Chairman Waxman promised me, before he was Chairman, saying 'we want to have a hearing, and the only reason that we're not have hearings is because the Republicans are blocking us from having this hearing' - now that obstacle has been removed.
Peter: Yes it has!
Sibel: Ok! SO now we are saying 'please fulfil your promise, please do what you told us you were going to do' Granted, this is not a glitzy case in the media - as you know Peter, the mainstream media has been absolutely awful with these cases - so it's not a glitzy case, and it's not really a partisan case either. it involves certain corrupt individuals, and some of these people have been in the government agencies in various positions since 1989 - so it's not a really partisan issue, although a lot of it falls within this administration, and the gag orders have been issued by this administration, so we are saying 'Chairman Waxman, do what you are supposed to be doing' and we are waiting to hear back, and I’m hopeful. We have given them until the end of this week to come out and publicly commit to having these public, let me emphasize 'public,' hearings. I have testified behind closed doors, several times, I have testified inside these SCIFs - Secure Facilities - where you can talk about classified stuff. So we're talking about public hearings, and we have a list of several veteran FBI agents and managers who want to testify and tell the truth. They want to present their case, related to my case, and present congress and the American public with documents.
Peter: And where can we go if we want to sign this petition online, and also if you have Chairman Waxman's phone number, let's give that out.
Sibel: Well, you're going to have a guest, Luke Ryland, he has been leading that action campaign that is sponsored by 30+ organizations, and he's going to give out all that information. I don't have it right now in front of me. But we have already delivered the petition, so at this stage, we just want people to keep calling - keep calling Chairman Waxman, and Chairman Conyers, and say 'Please come out publicly and commit publicly that you are going to have this hearing, because they have already said 'Yes, there needs to be a hearing' - so now we want them to confirm this publicly. So it has come to a point where we just basically need to bombard them with calls, and emails, and tell them 'Do the right thing, and do it now.'
Peter: Very good. We need to take a break. Luke Ryland will be joining us from Australia after the break... (Break) We're talking to Sibel Edmonds about her case, and you've just heard, she speaks very articulately, but there are a lot of things that she can't say, because of the gag order issued under this murky State Secrets Privilege, which has been asserted under the Bush administration more times in the last 5 years than it was in the entire century or so that it existed prior to that. And I want to give out the phone number here, if you wanted to call Chairman Waxman's Washington office, it's 202-225-3976 - and his LA office is 323 -651-1040. Sibel Edmonds remains with us, and we're joined by Luke Ryland from Australia, he's an investigative journalist. Luke, welcome to the Peter B Collins show.
Luke: Hi Peter, thanks for having me on.
Peter: My pleasure, and if you're an advocate for Sibel Edmonds, I already like you, Luke.
Luke: Oh - that's very good! Unfortunately I missed the first segment of the show, so I'm not exactly sure what you've already spoken about
Peter: Well we gave a little background for people who might not have been familiar with Sibel’s case - I've talked with her many times over the last 3 years or so, and I always like to recap for people who may not know the background - so that's pretty much what we've covered. Luke, I wanted to ask you first for the website so people can add their names to the petition.
Luke: It's called Let Sibel Edmonds Speak at letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com - in fact, we're not asking people to sign the petition any more. Sibel may have mentioned that we're asking people to call those offices this afternoon and tomorrow when we'll have the final push, trying to swamp those offices so that we can have open hearings into Sibel’s case.
Peter: And based on what you've been able to ferret out, what would occur if Sibel was permitted to testify, in public, under oath.
Luke: Well, firstly, we'd see a lot of senior American politicians and statesmen go to prison, for a long time. You'll be familiar with some of the names, particularly the neocons - Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Marc Grossman who was the number 3 guy at the State Department under Richard Armitage, and, of course, members of Congress, most notably Dennis Hastert.
Peter: The former Speaker. From what I've been able to read online, there was a great post at DailyKos on Friday , there are some linked, subgroups that most members of the public aren't aware of that link some of the factions that are influential in the government of the nation of Turkey, with people who are clearly very powerful in our government in the US
Luke: That's right. There’s an organization called The American Turkish Council (ATC) which is the prime body involved that has been investigated by the FBI and the CIA for years, going back to 1996. In the Vanity Fair article about Sibel's case, she says that the ATC is a front for criminal activity - so the ATC is the main one, there are a couple of other subsidiary, Turkish-related organizations, but Sibel’s case also touches very heavily on AIPAC, the Israeli lobby.
Peter: Yes, we talk about them quite a bit - the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee
Luke: That's right. Sibel intimates that AIPAC and the American Turkish Council are both essentially front groups for a larger criminal network that deals with illegal arms trafficking and other illegal activities. So, it's going to be an explosive case if we can get the hearings - Sibel has probably mentioned that she's had hearings in congress before but they've all been behind closed doors, and nothing ever happens, so hopefully if we get public hearings, we'll see Richard Perle and Doug Feith in orange jumpsuits before long.
Peter: Let's take a call from Dave - Dave, you're on the air
Dave: ... I believe that the White House was up to their neck in bringing about 911, it served their purposes, and there’s' no place for an honest competent translator, fluent in the languages of the Middle East, to be going through all of the emails and transmissions that were taking place... and that's why they had to get rid of you, Sibel...
Peter: Sibel shouldn't comment on your question Dave, but let's turn to Luke Ryland.
Luke: I had some trouble hearing the question, I think the question was about whether you could have an honest FBI translator - there was a great interview that Sibel did last week with David Swanson called "What Would Happen if the FBI Hired an Honest Translator?" - and it goes into that exact issue. The key point that we can take away from that is that Sibel's co-worker and her boss were engaged in espionage, protecting this American Turkish Council that we mentioned earlier - that's documented, proven, signed & sealed.
Peter: That, I know, has been evaluated by Glenn Fine, the INSPECTOR GENERAL of the DoJ who evaluated Sibel Edmonds' allegations and found them highly credible.
Luke: Right, and if I can give you the kicker of the story, her boss at the time, Mike Feghali, has been promoted and promoted, and he's now in charge of the Arabic desk at the FBI translation unit. He has all 300 Arabic translators working under him - so he was corrupt back in 2001, and was probably being blackmailed, or bribed, one or the other, and he's been promoted ever since and now he's in charge of all Arabic speakers. America is obviously less safe, having a compromised person in that position.
Peter: And Luke, if you can tell us, is he the same individual who would erase the hard drive of Sibel’s work at the end of the day, and tell her to do it again because he wanted to create a backlog so that he could get a bigger budget for translation?
Luke: His argument was that he wanted a bigger budget, I have doubts about that. He was apparently in the pay of this criminal network, so arguing for a larger bureaucratic budget might be about the only thing that he could have fallen back on, but as far as I can read the case, that's complete nonsense.
Peter: (break) We have Sibel Edmonds, and Luke Ryland, who is advocating for Sibel Edmonds, because as we explained, Sibel has to be very careful because of a Federal Judge's imposition of a gag order under the so-called State Secrets Privilege - and Sibel, is there anything you'd like to add to what Luke & I discussed before we move on?
Sibel: I would like to actually go back and talk about the individuals that Luke Ryland named - for example, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Marc Grossman - another individual is Eric Edelman, because most people here already know, and they associate these guys with the neocons and also Israel, but there is another element there that ties all four individuals here. If you look at, for example, Richard Perle, & Douglas Feith, these two individuals between 1988/89 to about 1995/96, they set up a lobbying firm called International Advisors Inc, and they registered as foreign agents, representing the government of Turkey, this is Richard Perle, & Douglas Feith, and of course we know that they became top guys within the Pentagon after the Bush administration came into power. And then you look at Marc Grossman - Marc Grossman was the US ambassador to Turkey, from 1993 to 1997, and Marc Grossman became the number 3 guy in the State Department in this administration, and he resigned in 2005 and currently he is hired by one very large Turkish company that is also a front for a lot of illicit activities. Then you can look at Eric Edelman who, 2 or 3 years ago, took Douglas Feith's old position at the Pentagon, and Eric Edelman was another ambassador to Turkey until he took this position at the Pentagon, so not only do these guys have Israel in common, they have Turkey in common - and people really should be paying attention to this, and looking into it, and this is why Luke Ryland has been doing this incredible job in terms of piecing these elements together, and packaging it, because this information is public! It doesn’t matter if I’m gagged on some issues, there's so much out there and so much that can easily be pieced together that our mainstream media has failed us
Peter: Yeah, they're not interested
Sibel: They are not, and maybe there are some other reasons that we don't know about that occurs - a little bit of that we got a taste of during this Libby trial - about what happens behind closed doors with these hotshot mainstream media reporters - so these are the issues that Luke Ryland can talk about in detail and give more information on, and he's been leading this action campaign that is sponsored by 30+ organizations and he's been doing an extraordinary job in piecing the various aspects of my case.
Peter: So Luke, tell us a little more about the US-Turkey connection, because one of the things that surfaces that appears to, not contradict but to mitigate against this relationship, is that the US tried very hard to get Turkey to permit us to use Turkish bases to stage our attack on Iraq four years ago this week. And during the run-up, we kept increasing our bribery to $5-6 billion was offered to Turkey to permit us to do that, and in the end they said 'No' and that struck me as unusual independence from Turkey to the US.
Luke: That was an odd decision, and I think the Turkish government had to listen to the people, I think that 90-something percent of the population was against allowing the US to use Turkey as a staging ground. One of the issues that Sibel talks about is that there's an underlying governing elite in Turkey which includes the military and drug dealers and certain politicians that basically control what happens there, but for one reason or other, the current Prime Minister was able to withstand the pressure and block US access to Turkey - apart from that I can't really answer the question, Peter.
Peter: Understood. What do you know about these various relationships including Perle and Feith who I'm very interested in, not only because of their neocon status, but also they were very active in the Project For the New American Century, which many of us who are critical of the Bush administration is the blueprint for this imperial march which they have tried to lead us on. So what more can you tell us in terms of those connections and how they act against the interest of the American public.
Luke: Well, both Perle & Feith were also involved in writing the "Clean Break" document for Israel so Perle & Feith were both agents for Turkey as Sibel described, but they're also agents for Israel.
Peter: Well - they worked for the campaign for Bibi Netanyahu, didn't they?
Luke: Correct, and they wrote this document, A Clean Break, which outlined a lot of the military activity that they hoped to achieve, including invading Iraq. I think that document dates back to 1996. So they are agents of both Turkey and Israel - and they also have strong connections to defence companies - particularly Israeli defence companies - and they make a lot of money, there as well. Ex-CIA agent Phil Giraldi wrote a terrific article about 6 months ago that Sibel says describes her case "100%" - and in the article Giraldi describes how these neocons, Feith and Perle and others involved with Turkey, 'enrich themselves and distort foreign policy at the same time.' Now, a lot of what he is talking about is the military industrial complex, and having the neocons taking some cream off the top of each transaction that goes through - selling technology to both Israel and Turkey. And it appears that the ATC is one of the organizations that they use to bribe congress to make sure that these military sales go through.
Peter: Now, referencing Congress here Luke, the information that I’m familiar with indicates that when Hastert was Speaker, he received an unusual number of political campaign contributions to I think his Leadership PAC, that were in the amount of $199 - which is one dollar below the threshold that requires detailed reporting on who the donor is, as required by our Federal laws. Has anybody further investigated those bundled contributions from alleged Turkish groups that were funnelled into those campaigns?
Luke: We haven't got to the bottom of that. CREW - Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington - filed an appeal for an investigation that didn't go very far. But to clarify what you were saying, those alleged crimes go back to 1996, long before Hastert was Speaker, and that's one of the reasons why we need hearings into Sibel's case - because when you have this criminal activity, it cascades and snowballs, so even though Hastert was known to have been bribed, not only with these campaign contributions, but also a lot of other cash bribes delivered in suitcases and brown paper bags. This goes back to 97 and 98, and in 1999, Clinton tried to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate and charge Hastert, and others, for these crimes, but the investigation got shut down, and Hastert subsequently ascended to the Speakership. So you see this situation happen again and again in Sibel's case, the people who are known criminals keep getting promoted to higher and higher positions which gets us to the situation we have today where we get wars for no reason and that sort of thing.
Peter: Luke, as you look at this, some of the information that Sibel would probably provide in a public hearing if Henry Waxman follows through on his commitment, would challenge the official stories about what occurred in the attacks of September 11, 2001. And this gets into a whole difficult area, it is truly a Pandora’s box, just last night over dinner, talking with some very well-informed friends, I was trying to make the case about the serious questions about Building 7 at the WTC - which of course, came down well after the other two, late in the afternoon of Sep11 and we know have this stunning video from the BBC of a real-time report, at the point when WTC7 did come down, approximately 5.25pm. The problem we have is the BBC report precedes the event that it's reporting on by about 23 minutes, and there's a stunning shot of a reporter who is doing a 'stand-up,' as they call it, appears to be several miles away from the WTC site, but WTC7 is still clearly visible over her shoulder, in the background of this framed picture, as she is describing in the past tense, that WTC7 has come down! And there are many Americans who simply cannot process this, because it leads to questions about government complicity, advanced knowledge, of what occurred on 911.
Luke: Right - well, as far as I know, Sibel can't talk to anything that happened with WTC7 (Ed Note: I actually said, incorrectly, "Sibel can't talk to anything that happened with 911") but a lot of the information that she has does relate to 911 - the covering up of related information both before and after 911. I'll give you an example of 'before' - in April 2001 there was an event, an interrogation, where one of the FBI's longstanding informants told them that 'Osama bin Laden is going to attack the US with planes, 4 or 5 cities, in a few months, and the hijackers are all in place' (ed note: correction: only 'some' of the hijackers were in place). I don't think that many Americans know that they had such a specific warning, and one of the reasons they don't know is because that particular piece of information didn't surface in the 911 Commission report in their "Missed Opportunities" section - which I think is outrageous. There are some other things that Sibel knows about 911 that didn't make the report, for example, some of the people that she listened to on the wiretaps, I think it was the ATC but I'm not sure, organized passports (ed note: that should be visas) for at least two of the hijackers. So this information has been available, but again, didn't make it into the report. So the big question that Sibel has, if I can put words into her mouth, is 'Why on earth are they covering up all of this information?'
Peter: Sibel, what would you like to say at this juncture, please?
Sibel: Well, actually Luke did a great job. But that's one of the things that I've been trying to convey, and that is that there are so many different pieces of 911 that have been either covered up or classified and not everyone has access to everything. And I know about certain events and certain issues and certain pieces, others have their own area - and what I tell people is 'just take a look at the picture in general' - I mean, we still have that CIA report on 911 completely classified, peter. Here we are more than 5 years after 911 and the IG, so-called 'independent' IG, after years of investigation and questioning people and reviewing documents, they issued this report on 911: what the CIA knew, what they did, and the entire report is classified, and then you have the Phoenix Memo, and Colleen Rowley's piece, and Robert Wright in Chicago that had to do with Yassin al-Qadi, and then you have what Luke Ryland just referred to which is this documented incident which was given by a credible informant, and there are these forms, 302 forms, that the agents have to file after they get information from their informants, from their undercover informants, and they filed these 302 forms, they were not destroyed, they are still there in the FBI, and these agents reported these issues, and they gave the 911 Commission these 302 forms, yet it did not make it into the report. And in another case it had to do with certain translations of information of blueprints of these skyscrapers being sent to a certain region on the border of Pakistan and Iran, and this occurred in July 2001. I don't have any information, any idea about the buildings, World Trade Centre and WTC7, because that was not my area, again, my information was limited to what I’m reading, and that is basically the same thing that you are reading, but the other information, and the other pieces that I have first hand direct knowledge of, I have already documented that, I have already given it in a public letter to the 911 Commission, after they issued their quasi-report, and before that report was issued I testified inside the SCIF, I provided them with file numbers, I provided them with the names of the agents who would corroborate this information. Not only that, I drove some of these translators and agents who are not whistleblowers, they are not known individuals, to the Commissioners - and this was with the help I received from the 911 family members, and they testified inside the SCIF, these are the veteran agents involved in the counter-terrorism division of the Washington Field Office, and the headquarters. SO the question is 'What happened to all this information? Why are they going out of their way to cover it?"
Peter: We’ve got to take a break, Luke Ryland, thankyou very much for your work, thanks for joining us from Australia today - I hope we'll talk again.
Luke: Great to speak to you. I hope everyone can call Henry Waxman's office this afternoon and tomorrow. (break)
Peter: We're back with Sibel Edmonds, learn more about her work at the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition at NSWBC.org Sibel - do you want to listen in here? I'm going to make a call to Henry Waxman's office.
Sibel: Please!
Peter: Let's see what happens - see how they treat me. This is the LA office. (dials phone)
Doug (answers phone): Congressman Waxman's office.
Peter: Good afternoon - I'm Peter B Collins calling and I'm on the air on my talk-show here in San Francisco. I just called because I wanted to lend my voice, and ask you to pass the word to the congressman, that I support Sibel Edmonds, and I would like him to follow through on his promise to her to hold a public hearing where she can testify under oath and in public about what she knows.
Doug: Great - well I can certainly give him that message. We've received numerous calls today and previously regarding the same issue.
Peter: And has anyone called who is opposed to it?
Doug: Have not received one, no, not yet.
Peter: And do you have any indication that the Congressman is ready to schedule such a hearing?
Doug: We have not received any word in our district office here. That would be a matter to take up with the Washington office directly
Peter: Ok - What's your name please?
Doug: My name is Doug Merkel
Peter: Doug, thanks for taking my call, I appreciate it
Doug: We appreciate any calls, especially those related to the Oversight Committee.
Peter: Sibel, that's a pretty good reception
Sibel: It is, and I must really go on the record, and say that the committee, House government Reform committee, has been doing a great job. I don't know if you know about it or not, but last week, they finally passed this legislation in the House on the Whistleblower protection and this was the legislation that all our Whistleblowers - our organization, and other supporting organizations such as POGO and GAP have been fighting for, for 2.5-3 years, and they kept blocking it and not introducing it, and Chairman Waxman kept his promise on that issue, he really pushed it hard, and he has some really good people, staff members in the committee, and they really pushed it hard. It's not 100%, but by far it's the best legislation so far introduced and passed, as far as Whistleblower protection goes. Now it's going to the Senate, and of course it will be blocked there because we don’t have many Democrats there who are actually supporting the Whistleblowers in the Senate - it's very unfortunate. So Waxman has been good, and he promises, and so far we are optimistic, and positive, and we also believe that they need the push, they need that little last push to really do the right thing, because they have a lot of different issues, they have a lot of different cases. This has been going on for five years, and it's not a case to be investigated, that part has already been done by the Senate Judiciary Committee, by the DoJ's Inspector Generals office, so it just have to have a hearing and just put an end to it and see some oversight and accountability as a result. So, as you said, it's looking good, and I'm so hopeful, and again, if your callers would please keep calling - both the DC office and the LA office, and just lend your support and urge them to hold these hearings, I think we can get to the bottom of this, and get it done, Peter.
Peter: The LA office for Henry Waxman again is 323-651-1040. The Washington office is 202-225-3976. And Sibel, once again, I really appreciate your courage in coming forward, and for spending this time with us, and you don't only focus on your own issues at the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, you have attracted support from what, 100 whistleblowers now?
Sibel: Correct - we have more than 100 whistleblowers from the FBI, CIA, NSA, DoD and Department of Homeland Security.
Peter: And there’s a lot of work to be done. Even if we can just roll back some of the worst efforts of the Bush administration... some of these problems precede Bush, to be fair, and there's a lot of work to pull back the curtains and bring sunshine to some of the nefarious relationships, connections, and outright criminal behaviour which has occurred inside our government, and remains unexposed in most cases.
Sibel: Thank you peter, it's always good to be on your show, and hopefully we'll have another show in the near future, announcing some success here and basically have a cheery conversation about 'Hey, sometimes you'll see a little bit of justice taking place within out government and sometimes we have representatives who are doing their jobs and representing the people.
Peter: Well, I want you to testify, and I’d really like to be there, so let me know if you get word that you'll be invited.
Sibel: I certainly will, Peter
Peter: Sibel Edmonds. A fine American, thank you for joining us today.
-------------------------
A fine American indeed.
Today's your last chance folks.
Call Henry Waxman's office (202-225-3976, Capitol switchboard 800-828-0498) to demand *public* hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case.
It's easy. And important.
I'll be doing one final interview for the campaign on Charles Goyette's show at 9.05aam today for 30 mins. Listen live here.
For more, see campaign HQ at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak.
We have a post over there called: "Sibel Edmonds: The most ungagged person in American History (and I helped!)" where you can let us know that you made a call and helped put Perle & Feith in prison. Is there a better way to start your Tuesday? I think not.
Sibel guarantees that if we have public hearings, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Marc Grossman, and Dennis Hastert will go to prison for a long time. If any of that appeals to you, for any reason, call Waxman today. Please.
If you want some more background on the case, please see lukery.dailykos.com - particularly "What the heck is Sibel Edmonds' Case about? And why should I care?"
We've been getting positive feedback from Waxman's office, and we just need to drive the final nail into the coffin today.
Today's fresh content is an interview that Sibel and I did with Peter B Collins on Monday evening. (audio)
Here's the interview, I appear to have missed the start.
-----------------------
Peter: ... Your voice has been ruthlessly suppressed at a time when we really need to hear the truth about what you know and how you were treated when you attempted to blow the whistle at the FBI.
Sibel: Peter, as you know, the ACLU declared me as the most gagged American citizen in the US history. They invoked the State Secrets Privilege twice in my case, they have issued various gag orders, they even ordered a gag order in May 2004 on Congress - this is the Department of Justice, first under then-Attorney General Ashcroft, and then later by Alberto Gonzales. Basically, these gag orders and the State Secrets Privilege, deprive you of your 1st amendment right, your 4th amendment right, and your 5th amendment right - and they aren't doing this to some suspected terrorist, or what they call foreign terrorists, they're doing it to an American citizen who reported serious, confirmed wrongdoing through the appropriate channels, by the way. As you know the DoJ's IG's office issued a report 18 months ago that vindicated my report, and they basically said that my allegations were confirmed by other witnesses, evidence and documents, etc. Also, we had two senators, bi-partisan, Senators Grassley and Leahy who publicly confirmed my case and my report, and this was the statement by Senator Grassley, who said: 'Even the FBI management confirmed her report.' So you're not looking, as I said, with these phony, quasi cases that they usually refer to as 'We only do this to suspects, terrorists, etc' - this is what they're doing inside our country, this is what they're doing to an American citizen, and this is what they are getting away with - both in court, and up to this point, in Congress. I have been fighting to reverse this, because what they're doing is not constitutional, it's against the Bill of Rights - plus, covering up these reports absolutely damages our national security. So, 30-plus organizations came together, including the ACLU, POGO, GAP, National Coalition Against Censorship, Liberty Coalition, its transpartisan, you have 30-plus organizations involving civil liberties issues and whistleblower issues and privacy issues, and they put together this joint petition that they served Chairman Waxman of the House government Reform Committee two weeks ago. This petition says 'Chairman Waxman, it's been five years, and there are other witnesses, other FBI witnesses who want to testify in this case, because this case involves some criminal activities by certain people in our own government! We are not only talking about terrorist activities here and we want you to have open public hearings on this case' So we served the committee, we served Chairman Waxman, and all these organizations put out press releases saying 'this is what we did' - and we have had 15-20 thousand American citizens who have signed the petition, we've had thousands of people who have called, and we're still asking them to call - basically urging the committee and as the name of the committee suggests - this is the government Reform Committee - and these wrongdoings have occurred within our government agencies, by our government officials, and they have the power - Chairman Waxman has been great, before they became the majority, they actually, the committee and Chairman Waxman promised me, before he was Chairman, saying 'we want to have a hearing, and the only reason that we're not have hearings is because the Republicans are blocking us from having this hearing' - now that obstacle has been removed.
Peter: Yes it has!
Sibel: Ok! SO now we are saying 'please fulfil your promise, please do what you told us you were going to do' Granted, this is not a glitzy case in the media - as you know Peter, the mainstream media has been absolutely awful with these cases - so it's not a glitzy case, and it's not really a partisan case either. it involves certain corrupt individuals, and some of these people have been in the government agencies in various positions since 1989 - so it's not a really partisan issue, although a lot of it falls within this administration, and the gag orders have been issued by this administration, so we are saying 'Chairman Waxman, do what you are supposed to be doing' and we are waiting to hear back, and I’m hopeful. We have given them until the end of this week to come out and publicly commit to having these public, let me emphasize 'public,' hearings. I have testified behind closed doors, several times, I have testified inside these SCIFs - Secure Facilities - where you can talk about classified stuff. So we're talking about public hearings, and we have a list of several veteran FBI agents and managers who want to testify and tell the truth. They want to present their case, related to my case, and present congress and the American public with documents.
Peter: And where can we go if we want to sign this petition online, and also if you have Chairman Waxman's phone number, let's give that out.
Sibel: Well, you're going to have a guest, Luke Ryland, he has been leading that action campaign that is sponsored by 30+ organizations, and he's going to give out all that information. I don't have it right now in front of me. But we have already delivered the petition, so at this stage, we just want people to keep calling - keep calling Chairman Waxman, and Chairman Conyers, and say 'Please come out publicly and commit publicly that you are going to have this hearing, because they have already said 'Yes, there needs to be a hearing' - so now we want them to confirm this publicly. So it has come to a point where we just basically need to bombard them with calls, and emails, and tell them 'Do the right thing, and do it now.'
Peter: Very good. We need to take a break. Luke Ryland will be joining us from Australia after the break... (Break) We're talking to Sibel Edmonds about her case, and you've just heard, she speaks very articulately, but there are a lot of things that she can't say, because of the gag order issued under this murky State Secrets Privilege, which has been asserted under the Bush administration more times in the last 5 years than it was in the entire century or so that it existed prior to that. And I want to give out the phone number here, if you wanted to call Chairman Waxman's Washington office, it's 202-225-3976 - and his LA office is 323 -651-1040. Sibel Edmonds remains with us, and we're joined by Luke Ryland from Australia, he's an investigative journalist. Luke, welcome to the Peter B Collins show.
Luke: Hi Peter, thanks for having me on.
Peter: My pleasure, and if you're an advocate for Sibel Edmonds, I already like you, Luke.
Luke: Oh - that's very good! Unfortunately I missed the first segment of the show, so I'm not exactly sure what you've already spoken about
Peter: Well we gave a little background for people who might not have been familiar with Sibel’s case - I've talked with her many times over the last 3 years or so, and I always like to recap for people who may not know the background - so that's pretty much what we've covered. Luke, I wanted to ask you first for the website so people can add their names to the petition.
Luke: It's called Let Sibel Edmonds Speak at letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com - in fact, we're not asking people to sign the petition any more. Sibel may have mentioned that we're asking people to call those offices this afternoon and tomorrow when we'll have the final push, trying to swamp those offices so that we can have open hearings into Sibel’s case.
Peter: And based on what you've been able to ferret out, what would occur if Sibel was permitted to testify, in public, under oath.
Luke: Well, firstly, we'd see a lot of senior American politicians and statesmen go to prison, for a long time. You'll be familiar with some of the names, particularly the neocons - Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Marc Grossman who was the number 3 guy at the State Department under Richard Armitage, and, of course, members of Congress, most notably Dennis Hastert.
Peter: The former Speaker. From what I've been able to read online, there was a great post at DailyKos on Friday , there are some linked, subgroups that most members of the public aren't aware of that link some of the factions that are influential in the government of the nation of Turkey, with people who are clearly very powerful in our government in the US
Luke: That's right. There’s an organization called The American Turkish Council (ATC) which is the prime body involved that has been investigated by the FBI and the CIA for years, going back to 1996. In the Vanity Fair article about Sibel's case, she says that the ATC is a front for criminal activity - so the ATC is the main one, there are a couple of other subsidiary, Turkish-related organizations, but Sibel’s case also touches very heavily on AIPAC, the Israeli lobby.
Peter: Yes, we talk about them quite a bit - the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee
Luke: That's right. Sibel intimates that AIPAC and the American Turkish Council are both essentially front groups for a larger criminal network that deals with illegal arms trafficking and other illegal activities. So, it's going to be an explosive case if we can get the hearings - Sibel has probably mentioned that she's had hearings in congress before but they've all been behind closed doors, and nothing ever happens, so hopefully if we get public hearings, we'll see Richard Perle and Doug Feith in orange jumpsuits before long.
Peter: Let's take a call from Dave - Dave, you're on the air
Dave: ... I believe that the White House was up to their neck in bringing about 911, it served their purposes, and there’s' no place for an honest competent translator, fluent in the languages of the Middle East, to be going through all of the emails and transmissions that were taking place... and that's why they had to get rid of you, Sibel...
Peter: Sibel shouldn't comment on your question Dave, but let's turn to Luke Ryland.
Luke: I had some trouble hearing the question, I think the question was about whether you could have an honest FBI translator - there was a great interview that Sibel did last week with David Swanson called "What Would Happen if the FBI Hired an Honest Translator?" - and it goes into that exact issue. The key point that we can take away from that is that Sibel's co-worker and her boss were engaged in espionage, protecting this American Turkish Council that we mentioned earlier - that's documented, proven, signed & sealed.
Peter: That, I know, has been evaluated by Glenn Fine, the INSPECTOR GENERAL of the DoJ who evaluated Sibel Edmonds' allegations and found them highly credible.
Luke: Right, and if I can give you the kicker of the story, her boss at the time, Mike Feghali, has been promoted and promoted, and he's now in charge of the Arabic desk at the FBI translation unit. He has all 300 Arabic translators working under him - so he was corrupt back in 2001, and was probably being blackmailed, or bribed, one or the other, and he's been promoted ever since and now he's in charge of all Arabic speakers. America is obviously less safe, having a compromised person in that position.
Peter: And Luke, if you can tell us, is he the same individual who would erase the hard drive of Sibel’s work at the end of the day, and tell her to do it again because he wanted to create a backlog so that he could get a bigger budget for translation?
Luke: His argument was that he wanted a bigger budget, I have doubts about that. He was apparently in the pay of this criminal network, so arguing for a larger bureaucratic budget might be about the only thing that he could have fallen back on, but as far as I can read the case, that's complete nonsense.
Peter: (break) We have Sibel Edmonds, and Luke Ryland, who is advocating for Sibel Edmonds, because as we explained, Sibel has to be very careful because of a Federal Judge's imposition of a gag order under the so-called State Secrets Privilege - and Sibel, is there anything you'd like to add to what Luke & I discussed before we move on?
Sibel: I would like to actually go back and talk about the individuals that Luke Ryland named - for example, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Marc Grossman - another individual is Eric Edelman, because most people here already know, and they associate these guys with the neocons and also Israel, but there is another element there that ties all four individuals here. If you look at, for example, Richard Perle, & Douglas Feith, these two individuals between 1988/89 to about 1995/96, they set up a lobbying firm called International Advisors Inc, and they registered as foreign agents, representing the government of Turkey, this is Richard Perle, & Douglas Feith, and of course we know that they became top guys within the Pentagon after the Bush administration came into power. And then you look at Marc Grossman - Marc Grossman was the US ambassador to Turkey, from 1993 to 1997, and Marc Grossman became the number 3 guy in the State Department in this administration, and he resigned in 2005 and currently he is hired by one very large Turkish company that is also a front for a lot of illicit activities. Then you can look at Eric Edelman who, 2 or 3 years ago, took Douglas Feith's old position at the Pentagon, and Eric Edelman was another ambassador to Turkey until he took this position at the Pentagon, so not only do these guys have Israel in common, they have Turkey in common - and people really should be paying attention to this, and looking into it, and this is why Luke Ryland has been doing this incredible job in terms of piecing these elements together, and packaging it, because this information is public! It doesn’t matter if I’m gagged on some issues, there's so much out there and so much that can easily be pieced together that our mainstream media has failed us
Peter: Yeah, they're not interested
Sibel: They are not, and maybe there are some other reasons that we don't know about that occurs - a little bit of that we got a taste of during this Libby trial - about what happens behind closed doors with these hotshot mainstream media reporters - so these are the issues that Luke Ryland can talk about in detail and give more information on, and he's been leading this action campaign that is sponsored by 30+ organizations and he's been doing an extraordinary job in piecing the various aspects of my case.
Peter: So Luke, tell us a little more about the US-Turkey connection, because one of the things that surfaces that appears to, not contradict but to mitigate against this relationship, is that the US tried very hard to get Turkey to permit us to use Turkish bases to stage our attack on Iraq four years ago this week. And during the run-up, we kept increasing our bribery to $5-6 billion was offered to Turkey to permit us to do that, and in the end they said 'No' and that struck me as unusual independence from Turkey to the US.
Luke: That was an odd decision, and I think the Turkish government had to listen to the people, I think that 90-something percent of the population was against allowing the US to use Turkey as a staging ground. One of the issues that Sibel talks about is that there's an underlying governing elite in Turkey which includes the military and drug dealers and certain politicians that basically control what happens there, but for one reason or other, the current Prime Minister was able to withstand the pressure and block US access to Turkey - apart from that I can't really answer the question, Peter.
Peter: Understood. What do you know about these various relationships including Perle and Feith who I'm very interested in, not only because of their neocon status, but also they were very active in the Project For the New American Century, which many of us who are critical of the Bush administration is the blueprint for this imperial march which they have tried to lead us on. So what more can you tell us in terms of those connections and how they act against the interest of the American public.
Luke: Well, both Perle & Feith were also involved in writing the "Clean Break" document for Israel so Perle & Feith were both agents for Turkey as Sibel described, but they're also agents for Israel.
Peter: Well - they worked for the campaign for Bibi Netanyahu, didn't they?
Luke: Correct, and they wrote this document, A Clean Break, which outlined a lot of the military activity that they hoped to achieve, including invading Iraq. I think that document dates back to 1996. So they are agents of both Turkey and Israel - and they also have strong connections to defence companies - particularly Israeli defence companies - and they make a lot of money, there as well. Ex-CIA agent Phil Giraldi wrote a terrific article about 6 months ago that Sibel says describes her case "100%" - and in the article Giraldi describes how these neocons, Feith and Perle and others involved with Turkey, 'enrich themselves and distort foreign policy at the same time.' Now, a lot of what he is talking about is the military industrial complex, and having the neocons taking some cream off the top of each transaction that goes through - selling technology to both Israel and Turkey. And it appears that the ATC is one of the organizations that they use to bribe congress to make sure that these military sales go through.
Peter: Now, referencing Congress here Luke, the information that I’m familiar with indicates that when Hastert was Speaker, he received an unusual number of political campaign contributions to I think his Leadership PAC, that were in the amount of $199 - which is one dollar below the threshold that requires detailed reporting on who the donor is, as required by our Federal laws. Has anybody further investigated those bundled contributions from alleged Turkish groups that were funnelled into those campaigns?
Luke: We haven't got to the bottom of that. CREW - Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington - filed an appeal for an investigation that didn't go very far. But to clarify what you were saying, those alleged crimes go back to 1996, long before Hastert was Speaker, and that's one of the reasons why we need hearings into Sibel's case - because when you have this criminal activity, it cascades and snowballs, so even though Hastert was known to have been bribed, not only with these campaign contributions, but also a lot of other cash bribes delivered in suitcases and brown paper bags. This goes back to 97 and 98, and in 1999, Clinton tried to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate and charge Hastert, and others, for these crimes, but the investigation got shut down, and Hastert subsequently ascended to the Speakership. So you see this situation happen again and again in Sibel's case, the people who are known criminals keep getting promoted to higher and higher positions which gets us to the situation we have today where we get wars for no reason and that sort of thing.
Peter: Luke, as you look at this, some of the information that Sibel would probably provide in a public hearing if Henry Waxman follows through on his commitment, would challenge the official stories about what occurred in the attacks of September 11, 2001. And this gets into a whole difficult area, it is truly a Pandora’s box, just last night over dinner, talking with some very well-informed friends, I was trying to make the case about the serious questions about Building 7 at the WTC - which of course, came down well after the other two, late in the afternoon of Sep11 and we know have this stunning video from the BBC of a real-time report, at the point when WTC7 did come down, approximately 5.25pm. The problem we have is the BBC report precedes the event that it's reporting on by about 23 minutes, and there's a stunning shot of a reporter who is doing a 'stand-up,' as they call it, appears to be several miles away from the WTC site, but WTC7 is still clearly visible over her shoulder, in the background of this framed picture, as she is describing in the past tense, that WTC7 has come down! And there are many Americans who simply cannot process this, because it leads to questions about government complicity, advanced knowledge, of what occurred on 911.
Luke: Right - well, as far as I know, Sibel can't talk to anything that happened with WTC7 (Ed Note: I actually said, incorrectly, "Sibel can't talk to anything that happened with 911") but a lot of the information that she has does relate to 911 - the covering up of related information both before and after 911. I'll give you an example of 'before' - in April 2001 there was an event, an interrogation, where one of the FBI's longstanding informants told them that 'Osama bin Laden is going to attack the US with planes, 4 or 5 cities, in a few months, and the hijackers are all in place' (ed note: correction: only 'some' of the hijackers were in place). I don't think that many Americans know that they had such a specific warning, and one of the reasons they don't know is because that particular piece of information didn't surface in the 911 Commission report in their "Missed Opportunities" section - which I think is outrageous. There are some other things that Sibel knows about 911 that didn't make the report, for example, some of the people that she listened to on the wiretaps, I think it was the ATC but I'm not sure, organized passports (ed note: that should be visas) for at least two of the hijackers. So this information has been available, but again, didn't make it into the report. So the big question that Sibel has, if I can put words into her mouth, is 'Why on earth are they covering up all of this information?'
Peter: Sibel, what would you like to say at this juncture, please?
Sibel: Well, actually Luke did a great job. But that's one of the things that I've been trying to convey, and that is that there are so many different pieces of 911 that have been either covered up or classified and not everyone has access to everything. And I know about certain events and certain issues and certain pieces, others have their own area - and what I tell people is 'just take a look at the picture in general' - I mean, we still have that CIA report on 911 completely classified, peter. Here we are more than 5 years after 911 and the IG, so-called 'independent' IG, after years of investigation and questioning people and reviewing documents, they issued this report on 911: what the CIA knew, what they did, and the entire report is classified, and then you have the Phoenix Memo, and Colleen Rowley's piece, and Robert Wright in Chicago that had to do with Yassin al-Qadi, and then you have what Luke Ryland just referred to which is this documented incident which was given by a credible informant, and there are these forms, 302 forms, that the agents have to file after they get information from their informants, from their undercover informants, and they filed these 302 forms, they were not destroyed, they are still there in the FBI, and these agents reported these issues, and they gave the 911 Commission these 302 forms, yet it did not make it into the report. And in another case it had to do with certain translations of information of blueprints of these skyscrapers being sent to a certain region on the border of Pakistan and Iran, and this occurred in July 2001. I don't have any information, any idea about the buildings, World Trade Centre and WTC7, because that was not my area, again, my information was limited to what I’m reading, and that is basically the same thing that you are reading, but the other information, and the other pieces that I have first hand direct knowledge of, I have already documented that, I have already given it in a public letter to the 911 Commission, after they issued their quasi-report, and before that report was issued I testified inside the SCIF, I provided them with file numbers, I provided them with the names of the agents who would corroborate this information. Not only that, I drove some of these translators and agents who are not whistleblowers, they are not known individuals, to the Commissioners - and this was with the help I received from the 911 family members, and they testified inside the SCIF, these are the veteran agents involved in the counter-terrorism division of the Washington Field Office, and the headquarters. SO the question is 'What happened to all this information? Why are they going out of their way to cover it?"
Peter: We’ve got to take a break, Luke Ryland, thankyou very much for your work, thanks for joining us from Australia today - I hope we'll talk again.
Luke: Great to speak to you. I hope everyone can call Henry Waxman's office this afternoon and tomorrow. (break)
Peter: We're back with Sibel Edmonds, learn more about her work at the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition at NSWBC.org Sibel - do you want to listen in here? I'm going to make a call to Henry Waxman's office.
Sibel: Please!
Peter: Let's see what happens - see how they treat me. This is the LA office. (dials phone)
Doug (answers phone): Congressman Waxman's office.
Peter: Good afternoon - I'm Peter B Collins calling and I'm on the air on my talk-show here in San Francisco. I just called because I wanted to lend my voice, and ask you to pass the word to the congressman, that I support Sibel Edmonds, and I would like him to follow through on his promise to her to hold a public hearing where she can testify under oath and in public about what she knows.
Doug: Great - well I can certainly give him that message. We've received numerous calls today and previously regarding the same issue.
Peter: And has anyone called who is opposed to it?
Doug: Have not received one, no, not yet.
Peter: And do you have any indication that the Congressman is ready to schedule such a hearing?
Doug: We have not received any word in our district office here. That would be a matter to take up with the Washington office directly
Peter: Ok - What's your name please?
Doug: My name is Doug Merkel
Peter: Doug, thanks for taking my call, I appreciate it
Doug: We appreciate any calls, especially those related to the Oversight Committee.
Peter: Sibel, that's a pretty good reception
Sibel: It is, and I must really go on the record, and say that the committee, House government Reform committee, has been doing a great job. I don't know if you know about it or not, but last week, they finally passed this legislation in the House on the Whistleblower protection and this was the legislation that all our Whistleblowers - our organization, and other supporting organizations such as POGO and GAP have been fighting for, for 2.5-3 years, and they kept blocking it and not introducing it, and Chairman Waxman kept his promise on that issue, he really pushed it hard, and he has some really good people, staff members in the committee, and they really pushed it hard. It's not 100%, but by far it's the best legislation so far introduced and passed, as far as Whistleblower protection goes. Now it's going to the Senate, and of course it will be blocked there because we don’t have many Democrats there who are actually supporting the Whistleblowers in the Senate - it's very unfortunate. So Waxman has been good, and he promises, and so far we are optimistic, and positive, and we also believe that they need the push, they need that little last push to really do the right thing, because they have a lot of different issues, they have a lot of different cases. This has been going on for five years, and it's not a case to be investigated, that part has already been done by the Senate Judiciary Committee, by the DoJ's Inspector Generals office, so it just have to have a hearing and just put an end to it and see some oversight and accountability as a result. So, as you said, it's looking good, and I'm so hopeful, and again, if your callers would please keep calling - both the DC office and the LA office, and just lend your support and urge them to hold these hearings, I think we can get to the bottom of this, and get it done, Peter.
Peter: The LA office for Henry Waxman again is 323-651-1040. The Washington office is 202-225-3976. And Sibel, once again, I really appreciate your courage in coming forward, and for spending this time with us, and you don't only focus on your own issues at the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, you have attracted support from what, 100 whistleblowers now?
Sibel: Correct - we have more than 100 whistleblowers from the FBI, CIA, NSA, DoD and Department of Homeland Security.
Peter: And there’s a lot of work to be done. Even if we can just roll back some of the worst efforts of the Bush administration... some of these problems precede Bush, to be fair, and there's a lot of work to pull back the curtains and bring sunshine to some of the nefarious relationships, connections, and outright criminal behaviour which has occurred inside our government, and remains unexposed in most cases.
Sibel: Thank you peter, it's always good to be on your show, and hopefully we'll have another show in the near future, announcing some success here and basically have a cheery conversation about 'Hey, sometimes you'll see a little bit of justice taking place within out government and sometimes we have representatives who are doing their jobs and representing the people.
Peter: Well, I want you to testify, and I’d really like to be there, so let me know if you get word that you'll be invited.
Sibel: I certainly will, Peter
Peter: Sibel Edmonds. A fine American, thank you for joining us today.
-------------------------
A fine American indeed.
Today's your last chance folks.
Call Henry Waxman's office (202-225-3976, Capitol switchboard 800-828-0498) to demand *public* hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case.
It's easy. And important.
I'll be doing one final interview for the campaign on Charles Goyette's show at 9.05aam today for 30 mins. Listen live here.
For more, see campaign HQ at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak.
We have a post over there called: "Sibel Edmonds: The most ungagged person in American History (and I helped!)" where you can let us know that you made a call and helped put Perle & Feith in prison. Is there a better way to start your Tuesday? I think not.
Monday, March 19, 2007
You can help Sibel Edmonds & your country, today.
Let Sibel Edmonds Speak is a campaign we've been running for the last week asking people to demand that Henry Waxman hold hearings into former FBI translator and whistleblower Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege.
We've had a lot of support here as people learn more about Sibel's case, and I ask that you help turn that energy into hearings by calling Waxman and Conyers today, Monday, and Tuesday and we'll be asking Waxman to go on the record midweek and state that he will have hearings.
Congressman Waxman: ph: (202) 225-3976, fax: (202) 225-4099
Congressman Conyers: (202) 225-5126, fax (202) 225-0072
(Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498)
Over at campaign headquarters, I have a new post called "Sibel Edmonds: The most ungagged person in American History (and I helped!)" where we're asking you to go on the record and leave a comment saying that you made a call or sent a fax, and perhaps share any feedback that you received.
Downstairs, I'll discuss a few things that you might not know about Sibel's case...
------------
First, here's the video of the speech:
The official transcript is here. A snippet:
I wrote a post yesterday that some of you may have missed which attempts to document a very simple component of Sibel's story that should outrage everyone, and it doesn't require any familiarity with Sibel's case to comprehend. Sibel's boss was actively involved in espionage to protect the targets of the FBI's investigations. This is documented and acknowledged by the FBI and the Department of Justice etc. He got promoted, and now, five years later, he is in charge of the entire desk of 300 Arabic speaking translators. He was apparently being bribed and/or blackmailed 5 years ago into protecting targets of FBI investigations, and I can only presume that he is still being bribed/blackmailed by the same people - he certainly is compromised and a security risk. His promotion seems to suggest that all of the people above him are also compromised. That should scare the living daylights out of you and ought to be sufficient to get even your right-wing uncle in fly-over country to call Waxman and demand hearings.
Perhaps you could send him the post and ask him to make a call or two (hint, hint) and you won't even have to discuss the merits of firing gay Arabic linguists under Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
What else? Well, there's the fact that "Turkish (criminal) groups had been installing doctoral students at U.S. research institutions in order to (steal) information about black market nuclear weapons." These criminal groups were bribing people at the State Department to ensure that these 'students' got placed at the nuclear labs. Being criminal groups, they then sold their loot to the highest bidders, including America's state-based and terrorist enemies.
What else? Sibel is aware of an April 2001 FBI briefing that indicated that:
Incidentally, this event didn't make it into the 911 Commission's section on "missed opportunities."
What else? Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Marc Grossman and Dennis Hastert (and others) will all go to prison for a long time, presuming that the standard penalty for treason isn't implemented.
What else? To clarify, a lot of the writing I have done about Sibel's case has, for simplicity, assumed that the American Turkish Council is the only organization involved. There are a number of other Turkey-related organizations - Phil Giraldi mentions some of them in his article. More importantly, Sibel says (and Giraldi hints at this as well) that AIPAC and the ATC are both (equal?) fronts for the same criminal network that her case involves.
What else? In case you missed my "Sibel Edmonds, Valerie Plame and Brewster Jennings" post from last week, Valerie Plame's Brewster Jennings was investigating the ATC for years, which appears to support the claims that the ATC was involved in WMD proliferation. It isn't known whether Brewster Jennings was also investigating AIPAC
What else? In case you have no idea what I'm talking about, I wrote a post last week called "What the heck is Sibel Edmonds' Case about? And why should I care?"
What else? Because Sibel was a translator, there is documented evidence for all of her claims. She says:
What else? Sibel and I will be interviewed Monday night at 7eastern on Peter B Collins. Listen live or it'll be available at WhiteRoseSociety at some point soon. If it's a good interview, I'll try to transcribe it quickly, but time is going to be short in the next day or two (and it probably won't be great - I've only ever done 3 interviews in my life, all of them I the last 2 weeks - so I'm a total amateur)
What else? I think that's about it for now. Except, you know, begging that you call and demand hearings on Monday and Tuesday.
If I had to 'order' our priorities in terms of who to contact first etc, I'd say (I'd prefer calls and faxes rather than emails):
1. Waxman's DC office:
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
Michelle Ash (Michelle.Ash@mail.house.gov)
David Rapallo (David.Rapallo@mail.house.gov)
2. Waxman's Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
(202) 225-5051 (phone)
email
3. John Conyers' DC office:
(202) 225-5126 (phone)
(202) 225-0072 (Fax)
email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
What else? Don't forget to tell us how you get along, and register that you helped ungag Sibel at "Sibel Edmonds: The most ungagged person in American History (and I helped!)"
We've had a lot of support here as people learn more about Sibel's case, and I ask that you help turn that energy into hearings by calling Waxman and Conyers today, Monday, and Tuesday and we'll be asking Waxman to go on the record midweek and state that he will have hearings.
Congressman Waxman: ph: (202) 225-3976, fax: (202) 225-4099
Congressman Conyers: (202) 225-5126, fax (202) 225-0072
(Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498)
Over at campaign headquarters, I have a new post called "Sibel Edmonds: The most ungagged person in American History (and I helped!)" where we're asking you to go on the record and leave a comment saying that you made a call or sent a fax, and perhaps share any feedback that you received.
Downstairs, I'll discuss a few things that you might not know about Sibel's case...
------------
First, here's the video of the speech:
The official transcript is here. A snippet:
"We must be vigilant & fight back, for our freedom is under assault – not from terrorists – for they only attack us, not our freedom, and they can never prevail. No, the attacks on our freedom are from within, from our very own government; and unless we recognize these attacks for what they are, and stand up, and speak out – no shout out – against those despots in government who are attempting to silence the brave few who are warning us; then we are doomed to wake up one sad morning and wonder when and where our freedom died."
I wrote a post yesterday that some of you may have missed which attempts to document a very simple component of Sibel's story that should outrage everyone, and it doesn't require any familiarity with Sibel's case to comprehend. Sibel's boss was actively involved in espionage to protect the targets of the FBI's investigations. This is documented and acknowledged by the FBI and the Department of Justice etc. He got promoted, and now, five years later, he is in charge of the entire desk of 300 Arabic speaking translators. He was apparently being bribed and/or blackmailed 5 years ago into protecting targets of FBI investigations, and I can only presume that he is still being bribed/blackmailed by the same people - he certainly is compromised and a security risk. His promotion seems to suggest that all of the people above him are also compromised. That should scare the living daylights out of you and ought to be sufficient to get even your right-wing uncle in fly-over country to call Waxman and demand hearings.
Perhaps you could send him the post and ask him to make a call or two (hint, hint) and you won't even have to discuss the merits of firing gay Arabic linguists under Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
What else? Well, there's the fact that "Turkish (criminal) groups had been installing doctoral students at U.S. research institutions in order to (steal) information about black market nuclear weapons." These criminal groups were bribing people at the State Department to ensure that these 'students' got placed at the nuclear labs. Being criminal groups, they then sold their loot to the highest bidders, including America's state-based and terrorist enemies.
What else? Sibel is aware of an April 2001 FBI briefing that indicated that:
1) Osama bin Laden was planning a major terrorist attack in the United States targeting four or five major cities; 2) the attack was going to involve airplanes; 3) some of the individuals in charge of carrying out this attack were already in place in the United States; 4) the attack was going to be carried out soon, in a few months. The agents who received this information reported it to their superior, Special Agent in Charge of Counterterrorism Thomas Frields at the FBI Washington Field Office... No action was taken by the special agent in charge, and after 9/11 the agents and the translators were told to "keep quiet" regarding this issue.
Incidentally, this event didn't make it into the 911 Commission's section on "missed opportunities."
What else? Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Marc Grossman and Dennis Hastert (and others) will all go to prison for a long time, presuming that the standard penalty for treason isn't implemented.
What else? To clarify, a lot of the writing I have done about Sibel's case has, for simplicity, assumed that the American Turkish Council is the only organization involved. There are a number of other Turkey-related organizations - Phil Giraldi mentions some of them in his article. More importantly, Sibel says (and Giraldi hints at this as well) that AIPAC and the ATC are both (equal?) fronts for the same criminal network that her case involves.
What else? In case you missed my "Sibel Edmonds, Valerie Plame and Brewster Jennings" post from last week, Valerie Plame's Brewster Jennings was investigating the ATC for years, which appears to support the claims that the ATC was involved in WMD proliferation. It isn't known whether Brewster Jennings was also investigating AIPAC
What else? In case you have no idea what I'm talking about, I wrote a post last week called "What the heck is Sibel Edmonds' Case about? And why should I care?"
What else? Because Sibel was a translator, there is documented evidence for all of her claims. She says:
"Put out those tapes. Put out those wiretaps. Put out those documents. Put out the truth. The truth is going to hurt them. The truth is going to set me free."
What else? Sibel and I will be interviewed Monday night at 7eastern on Peter B Collins. Listen live or it'll be available at WhiteRoseSociety at some point soon. If it's a good interview, I'll try to transcribe it quickly, but time is going to be short in the next day or two (and it probably won't be great - I've only ever done 3 interviews in my life, all of them I the last 2 weeks - so I'm a total amateur)
What else? I think that's about it for now. Except, you know, begging that you call and demand hearings on Monday and Tuesday.
If I had to 'order' our priorities in terms of who to contact first etc, I'd say (I'd prefer calls and faxes rather than emails):
1. Waxman's DC office:
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
Michelle Ash (Michelle.Ash@mail.house.gov)
David Rapallo (David.Rapallo@mail.house.gov)
2. Waxman's Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
(202) 225-5051 (phone)
3. John Conyers' DC office:
(202) 225-5126 (phone)
(202) 225-0072 (Fax)
email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
What else? Don't forget to tell us how you get along, and register that you helped ungag Sibel at "Sibel Edmonds: The most ungagged person in American History (and I helped!)"
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Sibel Edmonds: The most ungagged person in American History (and I helped!)
Ok - This is it folks. We are headed into the last 2 days of the campaign. We want everyone to call Henry Waxman's office and demand open hearings into Sibel's case. We are having a last minute push - Monday and Tuesday of this week - to make calls, and send faxes.
If you make one call, call Waxman's office. If you can make two calls, call his other offices, if you can make three calls, call Conyers' office. (contact details below)
Sibel is the most gagged person in US history - if we get hearings, then by definition, she'll be the most 'ungagged' person in US history. If you make a call on Monday and Tuesday, then you will be able to take credit for making this happen. We are nearly there.
When you've made a call, leave a comment in this post and go on the record here that you've done your bit. You'll be able to tell your kids, and your grandkids, and if you live long enough, their grandkids. More than that, imagine how much fun it will be watching the hearings, and seeing Perle, Feith and Hastert hauled away in orange jumpsuits..
------------------
Contact details:
Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498
Waxman Contact Details:
(ask for Michelle Ash (Michelle.Ash@mail.house.gov) & David Rapallo (David.Rapallo@mail.house.gov) )
In Washington, D.C.
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
In Los Angeles
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)
Conyers Contact Details:
Email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
(ask for Elliot Mintzberg)
Trenton, MI 48183
(734) 675-4084
(734) 675-4218 Fax
Detroit, MI 48226
(313) 961-5670
(313) 226-2085 Fax
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Sibel Edmonds: we aren't safe today. you can help.
Former FBI translator and whistleblower Sibel Edmonds discovered massive criminality when she was at the FBI and was told to shut up. Sibel is the most gagged person in US history. We're in the final days of a campaign, Let Sibel Edmonds Speak, to demand that Henry Waxman hold hearings into her case and the State Secrets Privilege. (contact details downstairs)
Because Sibel is gagged, and because her case is complicated, it can be difficult to understand of all the different elements. In this post, I will lay out the most simple of the issues that Sibel raised - espionage in the FBI translation department - and why it is still important today (hint: a confirmed 'mole'/foreign agent is in charge of all Arabic translators at the FBI.)
In other words, I hope that you can send this diary to your friends and family - people who may not be involved in politics, people who have never heard of Sibel - and they are sufficiently outraged that they can't wait to call Waxman on Monday morning and demand hearings.
The reason they should be outraged is because America is more likely to be attacked because of the information in this diary.
Last week, more than 30 'good-government' groups from across the political spectrum petitioned Henry Waxman to hold hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case.
From the petition:
Today I want to describe exactly what she's talking about regarding espionage at the FBI translation unit, and prove that we are all less safe because the problems have not been rectified - in fact, the problems are much worse today.
When Sibel Edmonds joined the FBI immediately after 911, she was the first and only Turkish translator there. Shortly afterwards, the FBI recruited two other translators, Melek Can Dickerson and Kevin Taskasen. Their boss was former translator Mike Feghali.
Let's dispense with Kevin Taskasen first, because he isn't particularly important in the scheme of things, although his situation does demonstrate the massive incompetence and cronyism in the translation department. Taskasen failed two language proficiency exams, English and Turkish, but his wife worked at the FBI's language testing center so... he got the job. Three months later he was sent to Guantanamo Bay to translate the interrogations: to perhaps help foil a new terror attack, or to help determine the guilt or otherwise of the prisoners held there.
Now on to more serious matters: Melek Can Dickerson.
In a fantastic interview with Sibel last week titled "What if the FBI Hired Someone Honest to Look into 9-11?" David Swanson said:
Not all translators are traitors, of course, but translators do have tremendous power, as Sibel described in the same interview:
In other words, America's enemies are motivated to A) try to recruit existing translators B) place their own translator 'moles' in the translation unit and C) if they're really lucky/skilled/successful, take over an entire 'desk' in the FBIs translation unit. Unfortunately, and scarily, in Sibel's case, we see all three.
Melek Can Dickerson had worked for at least three organizations that were under investigation by the FBI's counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism divisions. She lied on her application form, saying that she'd never worked before in her life, and was given Top Secret clearance and immediately began working in the translation unit. We don't know whether Dickerson was given her job, and Top Secret clearance, as a result of FBI incompetence or corruption - I suspect corruption - but it doesn't really matter, because within weeks of her arrival, the Turkish desk of the FBI translation unit was completely corrupted.
On Sunday December 2nd, 2001, Dickerson and her husband, Doug, arrived at Sibel's house and tried to persuade Sibel and her husband, Matthew, to join the American Turkish Council (ATC) - one of the organizations that Dickerson had previously worked for and failed to mention on her FBI application form. The Dickersons promised Sibel and her husband, Matthew, an early retirement if they joined the ATC. Sibel immediately recognized that she was being recruited to be a mole in the translation unit because the ATC, and some of the Dickersons' other friends, were targets of counter-intelligence & counter-terrorism investigations that Sibel had been translating at the FBI.
According to the 10-page Vanity Fair article on Sibel and her case, the ATC "was being used as a front for criminal activity" involving "laundering the profits of large-scale drug deals and of selling classified military technologies to the highest bidder." In other words, serious business. We also have evidence from a bunch of other places that suggest that the ATC was involved with all sorts of illegal activity - not least, we know that Valerie Plame's CIA front company, Brewster Jennings, had been investigating the ATC for years.
Brewster Jennings' main focus was Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), and we know that companies involved with the ATC were actually supplying rogue nations with nuclear technology - hardware, and nuclear secrets, stolen (via bribes paid to vaious State Dept officials) from US nuclear labs (Sandia, Los Alamos etc)
Story so far: FBI employed Melek Can Dickerson, an agent/mole for a foreign/criminal network involved in WMD (among other things). Dickerson tried to recruit Sibel into the network.
Sibel immediately reported the Dickerson's 'recruitment' attempt to her boss at the FBI, Mike Feghali, but he had already (if not before) been co-opted by Dickerson and the ATC. Within a month of Dickerson joining the FBI, she had changed the FBI translation unit's internal procedures, with the help of her boss, Feghali, so that she alone was in charge of translating any intercepts from her friends at the ATC (and elsewhere). Of course, now that Dickerson, the mole, was in charge of 'translating' her criminal friends' wiretaps, whenever she came across anything incriminating (and there were many such situations), she simply didn't translate it, or marked it 'Not Pertinent.'
Sibel thinks that Feghali and Dickerson were having an affair - often conducted in his office, during business hours. Not only that, he also
"covered-up information and leads pre and post 9/11" (for more, see Sibel's open letter to the 911 Commission)
Sibel reached out to Dennis Saccher, the F.B.I.’s special agent in charge of Turkish counter-intelligence, and told him what had happened. He said "It sounds like espionage to me." We aren't sure of what other payoffs Feghali may have received, from Dickerson or the ATC, but he clearly shouldn't be in charge of such a sensitive translation facility at the FBI. "The translator is a traitor."
Sibel took her case up the FBI hierarchy - eventually pleading her case that the translation unit, the frontline against America's enemies, had been infiltrated by a criminal network to FBI Director Robert Mueller, to no avail - and was eventually fired 'at the government's pleasure.'
Despite being fired, Sibel continued to try to bring attention to the fact that America was in danger because foreign criminal elements had taken over the FBI translation unit. She went to the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility (internal affairs), the Department of Justice's Inspector General, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Senate Judiciary Committee, the 911 Commission, and Henry Waxman's office. Every one of them confirmed Sibel's allegations - Republican Senator Charles Grassley explains why:
"Absolutely, she's credible. And the reason I feel she's very credible is because people within the FBI have corroborated a lot of her story."
Veteran FBI counterintelligence agent John Cole said the same thing:
In fact, in a CBS 60 Minutes report (download, 300 megs) by Ed Bradley about Sibel's case in 2002, Charles Grassley said angrily, about these facts, "We need to turn the FBI upside down." Five years later, and the FBI has indeed been turned upside down. Five years ago, Mike Feghali was in charge of three Turkish translators, a patriot, an incompetent, and a foreign agent - he fired the patriot, sent the incompetent to Guantanamo, and had an affair, and probably received payment, from the foreign agent. Five years later, he is no longer at the bottom of the pyramid, but at the top. The FBI has been turned upside down! Feghali has been promoted, and promoted again, and is now in charge of all Arabic speakers at the FBI. "The translator is a traitor."
And if Feghali's promotion isn't bad enough, in and of itself, let me repeat that Sibel's claims about him have been reported up the chain all the way to Direct Mueller, and her allegations have been verified by the FBI OPR, the Dept of Justice's Inspector General, the Senate Intelligence Committee and the 911 Commission. All of them know of Sibel's claims, all of them know that her claims have been validated, and all of them know that Feghali has been promoted again and again and that he is now in charge of all 300 Arabic translators.
Surely that makes us all much less safe.
For more detail on just this one element of Sibel's case, see my "Sibel Edmonds' Corrupt Boss is STILL the key to National Security" post.
Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman and Conyers demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege. We need you to call on Monday and Tuesday of this week - and we'll demand an answer from Waxman mid-week. Contact details below.
------------------
Some other matters.
1. If you are interested in more about the issues Sibel has raised, see this post from earlier in the week:
What the heck is Sibel Edmonds' Case about? And why should I care?
2. Sibel and I will be doing a joint interview on The Peter B. Collins Show on Monday at 7pm Eastern. You can listen live, or get the archive at White Rose Society.org
3. I gave a 90 min interview to Expert Witness Radio about Sibel's case last week. If you are quick, you'll be able to download the first 60mins from that site now. Tomorrow, they'll post the final 30 mins - which is mostly about Feghali and the 'incompetence-vs-corrupt' issue.
4. We have 2 days to go, folks. If we can't get hearings now, I don't think Sibel has anywhere to turn to. I'm serious - this is her/our last best chance. She's done EVERYTHING she possibly can. If you ever thought 'wow - she's tough' or 'wow - she's brave' or 'wow - she can bring down these bastards' or 'gee - I wish she'd just tell us what she knows' or 'wow - i'd love to know what sibel knows' or 'gee - Douglas Feith and Richard Perle should be in jail' or 'gee - I hope we are doing everything we can to keep the country safe' - well, now's your chance to help out. If you ever thought any of those things, you owe it to yourself, and to all of us to call Waxman (and Conyers) and demand hearings. And you should probably recruit as many people as you can to do the same. Call all the numbers below, and call them repeatedly. If we get hearings, imagine how much fun it will be to think 'Ya know, I helped in my own little way.' And if we don't get hearings, and you didn't make your phone call, my patience will be very thin every time I hear someone say 'The Dems are weak' or 'Why doesn't Sibel just tell us everything she knows?' or "How come Doug Feith, Richard Perls and Dennis Hastert are enjoying their riches and not in jail?" or any of a thousand similar statements I could conjur.
Seriously. This is it. We've had amazing support these last two weeks - our diaries have repeatedly been in the top recommended lists at DailyKos and DemocraticUnderground, and people have been re-posting our stuff like crazy all over the InterToobz - and we are eternally grateful for all the support. If we can also get you to call Waxman's office (and Conyers' if you have the time) then we'll make the Plame hearings yesterday look like Laura Bush's book club.
5. We are asking everyone who calls Waxman's office to go on the record at:Sibel Edmonds: The most ungagged person in American History (and I helped!) - with any luck, the most gagged woman in US History will soon be free to speak, and thus become the most ungagged woman. If you make a call, you can claim some credit. Make your call, then head over there and let us know that you did good. You great grandchildren will be proud.
I think that's all for the moment. More tomorrow.
=====================================
Contact details:
Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498
Emailers have suggested that those calling Waxman's office should ask for Michelle Ash (Michelle.Ash@mail.house.gov) & David Rapallo. Those calling Conyers' office should ask for Elliot Mintzberg.
Waxman Contact Details:
In Washington, D.C.
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
In Los Angeles
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)
Conyers Contact Details:
Email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
Trenton, MI 48183
(734) 675-4084
(734) 675-4218 Fax
Detroit, MI 48226
(313) 961-5670
(313) 226-2085 Fax
Because Sibel is gagged, and because her case is complicated, it can be difficult to understand of all the different elements. In this post, I will lay out the most simple of the issues that Sibel raised - espionage in the FBI translation department - and why it is still important today (hint: a confirmed 'mole'/foreign agent is in charge of all Arabic translators at the FBI.)
In other words, I hope that you can send this diary to your friends and family - people who may not be involved in politics, people who have never heard of Sibel - and they are sufficiently outraged that they can't wait to call Waxman on Monday morning and demand hearings.
The reason they should be outraged is because America is more likely to be attacked because of the information in this diary.
Last week, more than 30 'good-government' groups from across the political spectrum petitioned Henry Waxman to hold hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case.
From the petition:
The issues that were reported by Ms. Edmonds include:• Cases of espionage activities within the FBI...
• Cases of cover-up of information and leads pre and post 9/11, under the excuse of protecting certain diplomatic relations
• Cases of intentional blocking and mistranslation of crucial intelligence by FBI translators and management
Today I want to describe exactly what she's talking about regarding espionage at the FBI translation unit, and prove that we are all less safe because the problems have not been rectified - in fact, the problems are much worse today.
When Sibel Edmonds joined the FBI immediately after 911, she was the first and only Turkish translator there. Shortly afterwards, the FBI recruited two other translators, Melek Can Dickerson and Kevin Taskasen. Their boss was former translator Mike Feghali.
Let's dispense with Kevin Taskasen first, because he isn't particularly important in the scheme of things, although his situation does demonstrate the massive incompetence and cronyism in the translation department. Taskasen failed two language proficiency exams, English and Turkish, but his wife worked at the FBI's language testing center so... he got the job. Three months later he was sent to Guantanamo Bay to translate the interrogations: to perhaps help foil a new terror attack, or to help determine the guilt or otherwise of the prisoners held there.
Now on to more serious matters: Melek Can Dickerson.
In a fantastic interview with Sibel last week titled "What if the FBI Hired Someone Honest to Look into 9-11?" David Swanson said:
There's a saying in Italian "Traduttore traditore" which means "The translator is a traitor"...
Not all translators are traitors, of course, but translators do have tremendous power, as Sibel described in the same interview:
You know, a lot of people consider the language specialists as like a clerical job, but you need to realize, when the information comes... the first people exposed to it are the language specialists. Before that information gets transferred to agents or analysts, the first person who sees it is the language specialist... and that language specialist is in a position to decide whether or not this particular piece of information... is important enough to be translated, whether or not it should be translated verbatim - in detail, or just a summary translation. So by the time that information goes to an analyst or an agent, it has already gone through this filter of the language specialist.
In other words, America's enemies are motivated to A) try to recruit existing translators B) place their own translator 'moles' in the translation unit and C) if they're really lucky/skilled/successful, take over an entire 'desk' in the FBIs translation unit. Unfortunately, and scarily, in Sibel's case, we see all three.
Melek Can Dickerson had worked for at least three organizations that were under investigation by the FBI's counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism divisions. She lied on her application form, saying that she'd never worked before in her life, and was given Top Secret clearance and immediately began working in the translation unit. We don't know whether Dickerson was given her job, and Top Secret clearance, as a result of FBI incompetence or corruption - I suspect corruption - but it doesn't really matter, because within weeks of her arrival, the Turkish desk of the FBI translation unit was completely corrupted.
On Sunday December 2nd, 2001, Dickerson and her husband, Doug, arrived at Sibel's house and tried to persuade Sibel and her husband, Matthew, to join the American Turkish Council (ATC) - one of the organizations that Dickerson had previously worked for and failed to mention on her FBI application form. The Dickersons promised Sibel and her husband, Matthew, an early retirement if they joined the ATC. Sibel immediately recognized that she was being recruited to be a mole in the translation unit because the ATC, and some of the Dickersons' other friends, were targets of counter-intelligence & counter-terrorism investigations that Sibel had been translating at the FBI.
According to the 10-page Vanity Fair article on Sibel and her case, the ATC "was being used as a front for criminal activity" involving "laundering the profits of large-scale drug deals and of selling classified military technologies to the highest bidder." In other words, serious business. We also have evidence from a bunch of other places that suggest that the ATC was involved with all sorts of illegal activity - not least, we know that Valerie Plame's CIA front company, Brewster Jennings, had been investigating the ATC for years.
Brewster Jennings' main focus was Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), and we know that companies involved with the ATC were actually supplying rogue nations with nuclear technology - hardware, and nuclear secrets, stolen (via bribes paid to vaious State Dept officials) from US nuclear labs (Sandia, Los Alamos etc)
Story so far: FBI employed Melek Can Dickerson, an agent/mole for a foreign/criminal network involved in WMD (among other things). Dickerson tried to recruit Sibel into the network.
Sibel immediately reported the Dickerson's 'recruitment' attempt to her boss at the FBI, Mike Feghali, but he had already (if not before) been co-opted by Dickerson and the ATC. Within a month of Dickerson joining the FBI, she had changed the FBI translation unit's internal procedures, with the help of her boss, Feghali, so that she alone was in charge of translating any intercepts from her friends at the ATC (and elsewhere). Of course, now that Dickerson, the mole, was in charge of 'translating' her criminal friends' wiretaps, whenever she came across anything incriminating (and there were many such situations), she simply didn't translate it, or marked it 'Not Pertinent.'
Sibel thinks that Feghali and Dickerson were having an affair - often conducted in his office, during business hours. Not only that, he also
"covered-up information and leads pre and post 9/11" (for more, see Sibel's open letter to the 911 Commission)
Sibel reached out to Dennis Saccher, the F.B.I.’s special agent in charge of Turkish counter-intelligence, and told him what had happened. He said "It sounds like espionage to me." We aren't sure of what other payoffs Feghali may have received, from Dickerson or the ATC, but he clearly shouldn't be in charge of such a sensitive translation facility at the FBI. "The translator is a traitor."
Sibel took her case up the FBI hierarchy - eventually pleading her case that the translation unit, the frontline against America's enemies, had been infiltrated by a criminal network to FBI Director Robert Mueller, to no avail - and was eventually fired 'at the government's pleasure.'
Despite being fired, Sibel continued to try to bring attention to the fact that America was in danger because foreign criminal elements had taken over the FBI translation unit. She went to the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility (internal affairs), the Department of Justice's Inspector General, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Senate Judiciary Committee, the 911 Commission, and Henry Waxman's office. Every one of them confirmed Sibel's allegations - Republican Senator Charles Grassley explains why:
"Absolutely, she's credible. And the reason I feel she's very credible is because people within the FBI have corroborated a lot of her story."
Veteran FBI counterintelligence agent John Cole said the same thing:
"I knew (Sibel) was doing the right thing. I knew because she was right."
Cole tells how he had “talked to people who had read her file, who had read the investigative report, and they were telling me a totally different story” than FBI officials...
“They were telling me that Sibel Edmonds was a 100 percent accurate, that management knew that she was correct.”
In fact, in a CBS 60 Minutes report (download, 300 megs) by Ed Bradley about Sibel's case in 2002, Charles Grassley said angrily, about these facts, "We need to turn the FBI upside down." Five years later, and the FBI has indeed been turned upside down. Five years ago, Mike Feghali was in charge of three Turkish translators, a patriot, an incompetent, and a foreign agent - he fired the patriot, sent the incompetent to Guantanamo, and had an affair, and probably received payment, from the foreign agent. Five years later, he is no longer at the bottom of the pyramid, but at the top. The FBI has been turned upside down! Feghali has been promoted, and promoted again, and is now in charge of all Arabic speakers at the FBI. "The translator is a traitor."
And if Feghali's promotion isn't bad enough, in and of itself, let me repeat that Sibel's claims about him have been reported up the chain all the way to Direct Mueller, and her allegations have been verified by the FBI OPR, the Dept of Justice's Inspector General, the Senate Intelligence Committee and the 911 Commission. All of them know of Sibel's claims, all of them know that her claims have been validated, and all of them know that Feghali has been promoted again and again and that he is now in charge of all 300 Arabic translators.
Surely that makes us all much less safe.
For more detail on just this one element of Sibel's case, see my "Sibel Edmonds' Corrupt Boss is STILL the key to National Security" post.
Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman and Conyers demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege. We need you to call on Monday and Tuesday of this week - and we'll demand an answer from Waxman mid-week. Contact details below.
------------------
Some other matters.
1. If you are interested in more about the issues Sibel has raised, see this post from earlier in the week:
What the heck is Sibel Edmonds' Case about? And why should I care?
2. Sibel and I will be doing a joint interview on The Peter B. Collins Show on Monday at 7pm Eastern. You can listen live, or get the archive at White Rose Society.org
3. I gave a 90 min interview to Expert Witness Radio about Sibel's case last week. If you are quick, you'll be able to download the first 60mins from that site now. Tomorrow, they'll post the final 30 mins - which is mostly about Feghali and the 'incompetence-vs-corrupt' issue.
4. We have 2 days to go, folks. If we can't get hearings now, I don't think Sibel has anywhere to turn to. I'm serious - this is her/our last best chance. She's done EVERYTHING she possibly can. If you ever thought 'wow - she's tough' or 'wow - she's brave' or 'wow - she can bring down these bastards' or 'gee - I wish she'd just tell us what she knows' or 'wow - i'd love to know what sibel knows' or 'gee - Douglas Feith and Richard Perle should be in jail' or 'gee - I hope we are doing everything we can to keep the country safe' - well, now's your chance to help out. If you ever thought any of those things, you owe it to yourself, and to all of us to call Waxman (and Conyers) and demand hearings. And you should probably recruit as many people as you can to do the same. Call all the numbers below, and call them repeatedly. If we get hearings, imagine how much fun it will be to think 'Ya know, I helped in my own little way.' And if we don't get hearings, and you didn't make your phone call, my patience will be very thin every time I hear someone say 'The Dems are weak' or 'Why doesn't Sibel just tell us everything she knows?' or "How come Doug Feith, Richard Perls and Dennis Hastert are enjoying their riches and not in jail?" or any of a thousand similar statements I could conjur.
Seriously. This is it. We've had amazing support these last two weeks - our diaries have repeatedly been in the top recommended lists at DailyKos and DemocraticUnderground, and people have been re-posting our stuff like crazy all over the InterToobz - and we are eternally grateful for all the support. If we can also get you to call Waxman's office (and Conyers' if you have the time) then we'll make the Plame hearings yesterday look like Laura Bush's book club.
5. We are asking everyone who calls Waxman's office to go on the record at:Sibel Edmonds: The most ungagged person in American History (and I helped!) - with any luck, the most gagged woman in US History will soon be free to speak, and thus become the most ungagged woman. If you make a call, you can claim some credit. Make your call, then head over there and let us know that you did good. You great grandchildren will be proud.
I think that's all for the moment. More tomorrow.
=====================================
Contact details:
Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498
Emailers have suggested that those calling Waxman's office should ask for Michelle Ash (Michelle.Ash@mail.house.gov) & David Rapallo. Those calling Conyers' office should ask for Elliot Mintzberg.
Waxman Contact Details:
In Washington, D.C.
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
In Los Angeles
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)
Conyers Contact Details:
Email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
Trenton, MI 48183
(734) 675-4084
(734) 675-4218 Fax
Detroit, MI 48226
(313) 961-5670
(313) 226-2085 Fax
Steve Elson: Call Waxman & Conyers
Steve Elson, Veteran Agent at the FAA, has just sent out this release:
=================================================================
I received this note from Sibel Edmonds.
What Sibel has to say does have to do with national security -- she is trying to expose those in the government who are violating national security. For this she was fired, has had the FBI take her computers, her home searched, had threats, is hated by the Turkish government, and really had her life made miserable. All she did was accept an FBI request to come work for them after 9/11 and when she found foreign spies in the FBI, when she found corruption and criminal activities by leaders in congress, she reported them, within the chain of command. For this she was fired. The Inspector General of the Department of Justice, at a Christopher Shay's hearing last year, stated in sworn testimony, that his investigation and that of FBI OPR (internal affairs) found that Sibel Edmonds was 100% right! Yet Sibel remains fired, persecuted, and gagged. According to her gag order, imposed by Ashcroft and Gonzales, the AGs, it is illegal for her to even state where she went to school or what languages she speaks. If anyone thinks this is a national security issue, please let me hear from you. Additionally the government went back and retroclassified open source/public information, something I have never heard of before.
I forward the note from Sibel, one of my favorite and most admired people and great Americans (a naturalized, formerly legal alien). Take a look. There is so much information and the website can get confusing so all I am asking is that you look to the right when the site pops up and write and call or e-mail, the four congressmen to the right. I would also ask that you contact your own congress(wo)men and demand that Sibel be allowed under oath to state her case. If she violates national security and reveals classified information, then they can arrest her and I can sent her cakes.
In America, what happened to her should never been allowed to happen, but it did and must be corrected. I haven't met or discussed Sibel and her plight with anyone who has not been sympathetic. But it is time for action. Riding around with a little yellow ribbon on your car saying "support the troops" does absolutely nothing to support the troops. Calling and writing your congressperson and asking them why the hell the troops are living with rats and mold and demanding something being done -- now that is supporting the troops. Do that! And do the same thing to support, not really Sibel Edmonds, but her cause which is pure, basic and simply an American constitution cause/issue.
Remember when her story broke, the media was all over it because, "it was entertainment." But when it was no longer "news" but "olds" the media let it die and in doing so, lets part of America die. This is what the evil in the government count on and we can and must make a difference.
THANKS.
=================================================================
Thanks Steve. Great work.
=================================================================
I received this note from Sibel Edmonds.
Greetings,Sibel has done a lot to help whistle blowers, not people who reveal classified information, but those who honor their oaths of office and after going through their respective chains of command, went to congress (which did nothing), and finally went public.
This is a new site for the public action campaign to secure hearings on my case and the erroneous use of state secrets privilege to shut up and gag national security whistleblowers.
Let Sibel Edmonds Speak
What Sibel has to say does have to do with national security -- she is trying to expose those in the government who are violating national security. For this she was fired, has had the FBI take her computers, her home searched, had threats, is hated by the Turkish government, and really had her life made miserable. All she did was accept an FBI request to come work for them after 9/11 and when she found foreign spies in the FBI, when she found corruption and criminal activities by leaders in congress, she reported them, within the chain of command. For this she was fired. The Inspector General of the Department of Justice, at a Christopher Shay's hearing last year, stated in sworn testimony, that his investigation and that of FBI OPR (internal affairs) found that Sibel Edmonds was 100% right! Yet Sibel remains fired, persecuted, and gagged. According to her gag order, imposed by Ashcroft and Gonzales, the AGs, it is illegal for her to even state where she went to school or what languages she speaks. If anyone thinks this is a national security issue, please let me hear from you. Additionally the government went back and retroclassified open source/public information, something I have never heard of before.
I forward the note from Sibel, one of my favorite and most admired people and great Americans (a naturalized, formerly legal alien). Take a look. There is so much information and the website can get confusing so all I am asking is that you look to the right when the site pops up and write and call or e-mail, the four congressmen to the right. I would also ask that you contact your own congress(wo)men and demand that Sibel be allowed under oath to state her case. If she violates national security and reveals classified information, then they can arrest her and I can sent her cakes.
In America, what happened to her should never been allowed to happen, but it did and must be corrected. I haven't met or discussed Sibel and her plight with anyone who has not been sympathetic. But it is time for action. Riding around with a little yellow ribbon on your car saying "support the troops" does absolutely nothing to support the troops. Calling and writing your congressperson and asking them why the hell the troops are living with rats and mold and demanding something being done -- now that is supporting the troops. Do that! And do the same thing to support, not really Sibel Edmonds, but her cause which is pure, basic and simply an American constitution cause/issue.
Remember when her story broke, the media was all over it because, "it was entertainment." But when it was no longer "news" but "olds" the media let it die and in doing so, lets part of America die. This is what the evil in the government count on and we can and must make a difference.
THANKS.
=================================================================
Thanks Steve. Great work.
more interviews
Sibel and I will be doing a joint interview on The Peter B. Collins Show on Monday at 7pm Eastern. You can listen live, or get the archive at White Rose Society.org
We're going to have a final push for phone calls & faxes to Waxman on Monday and Tuesday.
A couple of typical messages that we've been getting:
Call Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126. - demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege. (Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498)
We're going to have a final push for phone calls & faxes to Waxman on Monday and Tuesday.
A couple of typical messages that we've been getting:
I called (Waxman) and Conyers offices a few days ago. Both receptionists were extremely receptive to my calls expressing how requests for Edmonds hearings had been escalating.and
I just had a very pleasant conversation with one of Congressmen Waxman's staffers.Buckle up folks. And please, please, please get on the phones on Monday & Tuesday.
After she fully acknowledged the flood of calls they have received about Sibel specifically, the intensity of the subject, the excitement of being involved in something of such magnitude... her inability to confirm one way or the other about plans and/or "announcements"... "you should stay tuned", was basically her summation.
Call Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126. - demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege. (Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498)
Friday, March 16, 2007
Sibel Edmonds, Valerie Plame and Brewster Jennings
With the Plame hearings scheduled today, I just wanted to make sure that everyone understands the link between Sibel Edmonds' case, Brewster Jennings and Valerie Plame.
I don't know a lot about how congressional hearings work - but it'll be interesting today to see if Waxman asks Valerie Plame what damage, if any, was done to Brewster Jennings when she was outed by Cheney/Libby/Armitage/Rove/Grossman in the summer of 2003.
It appears that there's some confusion about when Plame worked for Brewster Jennings, and Corn/Isikoff/JTFI notwithstanding, it appears that there is a general presumption that Plame was working for Brewster Jennings when she was outed after Joe Wilson's op-ed was published in the NYT.
As I discussed in yesterday's diary, the American Turkish Council (ATC) was at the core of the criminality that Sibel became privvy to - including, but not limited to, the nuclear black market.
From the diary:
It appears, and I'm speculating here, that Sibel actually heard that particular conversation where Grossman 'outed' Brewster Jennings, and I can only presume that Brewster Jennings was dismantled immediately.
In the new movie about Sibel "Kill The Messenger" there's a scene where Sibel 'describes' her familiarity with Brewster Jennings. I interviewed Mathieu Verboud, the director of the film, and he described it thusly:
This raises a whole bunch of other questions - including why did douchebag Novak write his second column 'outing' Brewster Jennings, and why did the administration take so much heat for 'outing' Brewster Jennings (when they outed Plame) if they didn't actually out Brewster Jennings? A very clever blogger suggested to me privately (and I'd credit them with the idea but I haven't asked for permission) that the administration realized that they'd got themselves in trouble after outing Plame, and so they decided to reach back to the Brewster Jennings claim so that they could pretend that they were working off old (not new, not classified) information (given that Brewster Jennings had been wound down 2 years earlier.)
Under this hypothesis, it appears, the administration/OVP realized they were on very shaky legal ground, and were happy to take the hits to what is left of their reputation by riding out the 'OMG! They outed Brewster Jennings!' fallacy, rather than risk shedding light on the fact that they were just using the old Brewster Jennings information as a CYA mechanism. At least, that's how we can (conceivably) read the story given what we know publicly - they may very well have used the 'but Brewster Jennings is long defunct!' argument behind closed doors. Regardless, their silence on this issue is deafening.
As an aside, I also want to share this anecdote from my interview with Kill The Messenger director Mathieu Verboud:
Congress must hold hearings to get to the bottom of these crimes. If you agree, please call Congress, today, and demand public, open hearings.
I don't know a lot about how congressional hearings work - but it'll be interesting today to see if Waxman asks Valerie Plame what damage, if any, was done to Brewster Jennings when she was outed by Cheney/Libby/Armitage/Rove/Grossman in the summer of 2003.
It appears that there's some confusion about when Plame worked for Brewster Jennings, and Corn/Isikoff/JTFI notwithstanding, it appears that there is a general presumption that Plame was working for Brewster Jennings when she was outed after Joe Wilson's op-ed was published in the NYT.
As I discussed in yesterday's diary, the American Turkish Council (ATC) was at the core of the criminality that Sibel became privvy to - including, but not limited to, the nuclear black market.
From the diary:
"Sibel's case also involves the nuclear black market - some Turkish members of the ATC have supplied Pakistan's A.Q. Khan network with hardware, as have American companies that Sibel overheard on the wiretaps. Perhaps even more disturbing, as reported in Vanity Fair, other wiretaps indicate that "Turkish groups had been installing doctoral students at U.S. research institutions in order to acquire information about black market nuclear weapons." Daniel Ellsberg says that, according to Sibel, bribes were paid to people at the State Department to facilitate this activity.The thing is, Brewster Jennings was 'outed' (privately, within the criminal network) long before Valerie Plame was officially outed. In fact, Brewster Jennings' cover was blown in the Summer of 2001 by Marc Grossman.
These are extraordinary claims, of course, and we have a lot of evidence to support the claims - including, but not limited to, the fact that Valerie Plame's front company, Brewster Jennings, had been conducting a counter-intelligence operation against the ATC for years."
It appears, and I'm speculating here, that Sibel actually heard that particular conversation where Grossman 'outed' Brewster Jennings, and I can only presume that Brewster Jennings was dismantled immediately.
In the new movie about Sibel "Kill The Messenger" there's a scene where Sibel 'describes' her familiarity with Brewster Jennings. I interviewed Mathieu Verboud, the director of the film, and he described it thusly:
"In November 2005, we learnt from the Turkish paper Hurriyet that Plame was investigating Turkey, but not only that: she was investigating the ATC! Our intuition had proved right.
Later, in April 2006, we confronted Sibel with this set of facts and ask her to go on the record. Sibel’s line about Plame and Brewster Jennings is just gold. She said: "During my time at the FBI, I never heard the name Valerie Plame - but if you are asking me about Brewster Jennings, that's another story, a story that I cannot comment on because I cannot talk about anything that I did at the FBI - and the targets and the details of the investigations." The message is crystal clear: there are mentions of Brewster Jennings on the wiretaps! Praises to Sibel to be so smart in front of a camera."
This raises a whole bunch of other questions - including why did douchebag Novak write his second column 'outing' Brewster Jennings, and why did the administration take so much heat for 'outing' Brewster Jennings (when they outed Plame) if they didn't actually out Brewster Jennings? A very clever blogger suggested to me privately (and I'd credit them with the idea but I haven't asked for permission) that the administration realized that they'd got themselves in trouble after outing Plame, and so they decided to reach back to the Brewster Jennings claim so that they could pretend that they were working off old (not new, not classified) information (given that Brewster Jennings had been wound down 2 years earlier.)
Under this hypothesis, it appears, the administration/OVP realized they were on very shaky legal ground, and were happy to take the hits to what is left of their reputation by riding out the 'OMG! They outed Brewster Jennings!' fallacy, rather than risk shedding light on the fact that they were just using the old Brewster Jennings information as a CYA mechanism. At least, that's how we can (conceivably) read the story given what we know publicly - they may very well have used the 'but Brewster Jennings is long defunct!' argument behind closed doors. Regardless, their silence on this issue is deafening.
As an aside, I also want to share this anecdote from my interview with Kill The Messenger director Mathieu Verboud:
Mathieu Verboud: Coming back to Grossman, exposing his role would have been interesting for the film, but the guy being what he is, there was no way that he would have given an interview if we had brought up any kind of charges. So we decided to just let him talk, give us his vision of Turkey...In any case, it'll be interesting to see if any of this comes out in the hearings today. As you know, Waxman knows all of this - Sibel has briefed his office in classified hearings - and it appears that he is going to make a decision (& announcement) early next week about whether he will hold separate hearings into her case.
Then we tested him - we asked him about Valerie Plame - and it was amazing to see his face change! He had the nerves to say that he didn’t know anything about Valerie Plame, or about Brewster Jennings - which is simply false! As mentioned earlier, his name had already appeared publicly in the Valerie Plame's case! Anyway, we didn't point out to that simple fact and fended off.
Next, we just mentioned that there was this little woman of Turkish origin whose name was mentioned in an article in Vanity Fair speaking about FBI and Turkey… His face changed again, and he came up with this answer: "Vanity Fair? I am afraid it is not a magazine I read!" We then asked him directly about Sibel Edmonds and he said that he didn't know anything about her. Even the name was "unfamiliar".
Luke Ryland: That's hysterical. When was that interview?
MV: early May 2006.
LR: (laughs) Oh that's great. And he's never heard of Sibel Edmonds and Valerie Plame. That's fantastic. I'd love to see that footage.
MV: Well - if we ever sell this film in the U.S, we will consider adding a small chapter on him.
Congress must hold hearings to get to the bottom of these crimes. If you agree, please call Congress, today, and demand public, open hearings.
Contact Information
Congressman Henry Waxman (contact page)
(Those calling Waxman's office should ask for Michelle Ash & David Rapallo.)
In Washington, D.C.
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
In Los Angeles
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)
House Government Reform Committee (contact page)
By Mail or Phone:
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-5051
Please also contact Congressman John Conyers, asking him to support hearings by Chairman Waxman.
(Those calling Conyers' office should ask for Elliot Mintzberg.)
Email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
Washington, DC
2426 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
Thursday, March 15, 2007
What the heck is Sibel Edmonds' Case about?
As part of our campaign this week to call for hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case, below is a short-as-possible piece which hopes to answer the burning question in Sibel's case: What the heck is her case about?
For a longer version, see my recent interview with Scott Horton
Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126 - demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege.
Sibel Edmonds' case is about the intersection of illegal arms trafficking, heroin trafficking, money laundering, terrorist activities and the corruption of many "highly-recognizable, highly-known names" in and around the US government. Sibel says that the people involved will go straight to prison if we can get hearings into her case. Richard Perle, in prison. Douglas Feith, in prison. Dennis Hastert, in prison. Marc Grossman, in prison.
According to Sibel, the best place to begin trying to understand the case is a recent article by Phil Giraldi in the American Conservative. Sibel says “Giraldi has it 100% right; this I consider the most accurate summary of my case.”
Giraldi writes:
The American Turkish Council (ATC)
The main Turkish lobbying group in the US is an organization called the American Turkish Council (ATC) - one of the most powerful lobby groups in the country. The ATC is heavily stacked with former government officials - statesmen, lobbyists and 'dime a dozen generals' - lobbyists and representatives of the military-industrial-complex (MIC). Brent Scowcroft is the chairman, and heavy hitters from Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Northrup Grumman and other 'defense' contractors populate the board.
It's perhaps not surprising, then, that Turkey is a major recipient of US military aid - running to the billions of dollars - with much of it financed by the US taxpayer. Giraldi suggests in his article that this largesse appears to be the result of bribes paid to congressmen - a suggestion that shouldn't surprise anyone - but there's much more to the story than the usual Iron Triangle / Revolving Door story that we're all familiar with.
In a 10-page article in Vanity Fair on Sibel's case, the ATC is described as "a front for criminal activity" involving "large-scale drug deals and of selling classified military technologies to the highest bidder." We'll discuss the drug side of the story shortly, but let's first take a quick look at the military technology element - not only are the MIC contractors bribing congress to ensure that military aid flows to Turkey (and Israel), the Turks and the Israelis are also illegally selling that technology to the highest bidder - which inevitably includes America's enemies, States, and terrorist groups.
Sibel's case also involves the nuclear black market - some Turkish members of the ATC have supplied Pakistan's A.Q. Khan network with hardware, as have American companies that Sibel overheard on the wiretaps. Perhaps even more disturbing, as reported in Vanity Fair, other wiretaps indicate that "Turkish groups had been installing doctoral students at U.S. research institutions in order to acquire information about black market nuclear weapons." Daniel Ellsberg says that, according to Sibel, bribes were paid to people at the State Department to facilitate this activity.
These are extraordinary claims, of course, and we have a lot of evidence to support the claims - including, but not limited to, the fact that Valerie Plame's front company, Brewster Jennings, had been conducting a counter-intelligence operation against the ATC for years.
One very interesting aspect of Sibel's case that has not really gained traction is that while the ATC is understood to be the key focus of her case, it appears that AIPAC is equally involved. In a terrific 2005 interview with Chris Deliso. Sibel said:
Reading between the lines (in a number of different places), it appears that Sibel was actively involved in 'the AIPAC investigation' as well as the investigation into the ATC. As she says, both the ATC and AIPAC are both 'fronts' for the 'same (criminal) operation.'
Drug Trafficking.
As I document in "Sibel Edmonds & the Neocons' Turkish Gravy-Train," Afghanistan supplies almost 90% of the world's heroin, and most of that goes straight to Turkey where it is processed, packaged, warehoused, and then re-exported to other countries for final consumption. Turkey supplies approximately 80% of Europe's heroin, and 15% of heroin in the US - worth approximately $40 billion at street prices.
Turkey is widely acknowledged to be controlled by a "Deep State." In 1996, a deadly car crash at a place called Susurluk blew this out into the open. In the car were four people who probably shouldn't have been in the car together:
And if that's not bad enough, we also know that:
When we are discussing issues such as al-Qaeda smuggling heroin through Afghanistan and the other 'Stans, sometimes it can seem remote and distant, so let's come back to something more concrete. In Adrian Gatton's terrific recent article, The Susurluk Legacy, he quotes Huseyin Baybasin, a Turkish heroin kingpin who is now in jail in Holland:
The parallels with Sibel's case couldn't be clearer. As 60 Minutes first reported (youtube) in 2002, and Vanity Fair later reported, the Turkish Embassy was directing a lot of the heroin trafficking activity - in conjunction with people at the ATC.
One of the difficulties in trying to unravel the Sibel Edmonds case is that we aren't sure where one case ends and another begins. We know that some of the wiretaps were from the ATC, and some from the Turkish embassy in DC, and some from the embassy in Chicago. We also know that many of the wiretaps involve conversations between the embassies and the ATC.
Some of the wiretaps relate to drug trafficking, some relate to the nuclear black market and other weapons trafficking, and some refer to terrorist activity - including 9/11.
Perhaps it's not surprising, then, when she says:
If what Sibel says is true, and her claims are all backed by documents and wiretaps, and also backed up by other agents who have filed similar complaints, and are ready and willing to testify. All of these people should be in jail. For a long, long time.
Congress must hold hearings to get to the bottom of these crimes. If you agree, please call Congress, today, and demand public, open hearings.
For a longer version, see my recent interview with Scott Horton
Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126 - demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege.
Sibel Edmonds' case is about the intersection of illegal arms trafficking, heroin trafficking, money laundering, terrorist activities and the corruption of many "highly-recognizable, highly-known names" in and around the US government. Sibel says that the people involved will go straight to prison if we can get hearings into her case. Richard Perle, in prison. Douglas Feith, in prison. Dennis Hastert, in prison. Marc Grossman, in prison.
According to Sibel, the best place to begin trying to understand the case is a recent article by Phil Giraldi in the American Conservative. Sibel says “Giraldi has it 100% right; this I consider the most accurate summary of my case.”
Giraldi writes:
"Sibel Edmonds... could provide a major insight into how neoconservatives distort US foreign policy and enrich themselves at the same time. On one level, her story appears straightforward: several Turkish lobbying groups allegedly bribed congressmen to support policies favourable to Ankara. But beyond that, the Edmonds revelations become more serpentine and appear to involve AIPAC, Israel and a number of leading neoconservatives who have profited from the Turkish connection.Giraldi goes on to list some neocons who are "linked to Turkey" - Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Marc Grossman, Eric Edelman, and Stephen Solarz - and he suggests that they "enrich themselves" via drug trafficking and arms dealing.
[]
Turkey benefits from the relationship by securing general benevolence and increased aid from the US Congress - as well as access to otherwise unattainable military technology. The Turkish General Staff has a particular interest because much of the military spending is channeled through companies in which the generals have a financial stake, making for a very cozy and comfortable business arrangement. The commercial interest has also fostered close political ties, with the American Turkish Council, American Turkish Cultural Alliance and the Assembly of Turkish American Associations all developing warm relationships with AIPAC and other Jewish and Israel advocacy groups throughout the US.
Someone has to be in the middle to keep the happy affair going, so enter the neocons, intent on securing Israel against all comers and also keen to turn a dollar."
The American Turkish Council (ATC)
The main Turkish lobbying group in the US is an organization called the American Turkish Council (ATC) - one of the most powerful lobby groups in the country. The ATC is heavily stacked with former government officials - statesmen, lobbyists and 'dime a dozen generals' - lobbyists and representatives of the military-industrial-complex (MIC). Brent Scowcroft is the chairman, and heavy hitters from Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Northrup Grumman and other 'defense' contractors populate the board.
It's perhaps not surprising, then, that Turkey is a major recipient of US military aid - running to the billions of dollars - with much of it financed by the US taxpayer. Giraldi suggests in his article that this largesse appears to be the result of bribes paid to congressmen - a suggestion that shouldn't surprise anyone - but there's much more to the story than the usual Iron Triangle / Revolving Door story that we're all familiar with.
In a 10-page article in Vanity Fair on Sibel's case, the ATC is described as "a front for criminal activity" involving "large-scale drug deals and of selling classified military technologies to the highest bidder." We'll discuss the drug side of the story shortly, but let's first take a quick look at the military technology element - not only are the MIC contractors bribing congress to ensure that military aid flows to Turkey (and Israel), the Turks and the Israelis are also illegally selling that technology to the highest bidder - which inevitably includes America's enemies, States, and terrorist groups.
Sibel's case also involves the nuclear black market - some Turkish members of the ATC have supplied Pakistan's A.Q. Khan network with hardware, as have American companies that Sibel overheard on the wiretaps. Perhaps even more disturbing, as reported in Vanity Fair, other wiretaps indicate that "Turkish groups had been installing doctoral students at U.S. research institutions in order to acquire information about black market nuclear weapons." Daniel Ellsberg says that, according to Sibel, bribes were paid to people at the State Department to facilitate this activity.
These are extraordinary claims, of course, and we have a lot of evidence to support the claims - including, but not limited to, the fact that Valerie Plame's front company, Brewster Jennings, had been conducting a counter-intelligence operation against the ATC for years.
One very interesting aspect of Sibel's case that has not really gained traction is that while the ATC is understood to be the key focus of her case, it appears that AIPAC is equally involved. In a terrific 2005 interview with Chris Deliso. Sibel said:
Essentially, there is only one investigation – a very big one, an all-inclusive one... But I can tell you there are a lot of people involved, a lot of ranking officials, and a lot of illegal activities that include multi-billion-dollar drug-smuggling operations, black-market nuclear sales to terrorists and unsavory regimes, you name it... You can start from the AIPAC angle. You can start from the Plame case. You can start from my case. They all end up going to the same place, and they revolve around the same nucleus of people.And she went a little bit further in a great interview with David Swanson this week:
"AIPAC helped form the American Turkish Council - look at the board members, look at the people. You will see the same people involved in both fronts, because it is the same operation."
Reading between the lines (in a number of different places), it appears that Sibel was actively involved in 'the AIPAC investigation' as well as the investigation into the ATC. As she says, both the ATC and AIPAC are both 'fronts' for the 'same (criminal) operation.'
Drug Trafficking.
As I document in "Sibel Edmonds & the Neocons' Turkish Gravy-Train," Afghanistan supplies almost 90% of the world's heroin, and most of that goes straight to Turkey where it is processed, packaged, warehoused, and then re-exported to other countries for final consumption. Turkey supplies approximately 80% of Europe's heroin, and 15% of heroin in the US - worth approximately $40 billion at street prices.
Turkey is widely acknowledged to be controlled by a "Deep State." In 1996, a deadly car crash at a place called Susurluk blew this out into the open. In the car were four people who probably shouldn't have been in the car together:
"an MP, a police chief, a beauty queen and her lover, a top Turkish gangster and hitman called Abdullah Catli... Catli, a heroin trafficker on Interpol’s wanted list, was carrying a diplomatic passport signed by none other than the Turkish Interior Minister himself.Sibel spells it out:
[]
The Susurluk Incident became Turkey’s Watergate, exposing the deep links between the Turkish state, terrorists and drug traffickers. It revealed what Turks call the Gizli Devlet, or Deep State – the politicians, military officers and intelligence officials who worked with drug bosses to move drugs from Afghanistan into Europe."
"The Turkish government, MIT and the Turkish military, not only sanctions, but also actively participates in and oversees the narcotics activities and networks."As I outlined in the curiously-titled "Sibel Edmonds: America's Watergate," Sibel's case demonstrates that Turkey's Deep State 'owns' large parts of the American establishment, to the point where it appears that there also is a 'Deep State' in the US as well. ATC/AIPAC appear to be headquarters for this Deep State in the US, a cozy club where drug dealers, weapons traffickers and past-and-present government officials coexist. Happily!
And if that's not bad enough, we also know that:
"Heroin trafficking is also the main source of funding for the al-Qaeda terrorists. A Time Magazine article in August 2004 reported that al-Qaeda has established a smuggling network that is peddling Afghan heroin to buyers across the Middle East, Asia, and Europe, and in turn is using the drug revenues to purchase weapons and explosives. The article states: “…al-Qaeda and its Taliban allies are increasingly financing operations with opium sales. Anti-drug officials in Afghanistan have no hard figures on how much al-Qaeda and the Taliban are earning from drugs, but conservative estimates run into tens of millions of dollars.”That is, our Turkish Deep State friends, the people we are directly providing with weapons, are outsourcing some of their distribution activities to al-Qaeda and the Taliban (and, while we're at it, to the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA.))
When we are discussing issues such as al-Qaeda smuggling heroin through Afghanistan and the other 'Stans, sometimes it can seem remote and distant, so let's come back to something more concrete. In Adrian Gatton's terrific recent article, The Susurluk Legacy, he quotes Huseyin Baybasin, a Turkish heroin kingpin who is now in jail in Holland:
“I handled the drugs which came through the channel of the Turkish Consulate in England... I was with the Mafia but I was carrying this out with the same Mafia group in which the rulers of Turkey were part.”Gatton also describes how anyone in the UK government who dared speak about the issue were immediately rebuked by the Foreign Office (the UK equivalent of the State Department.)
The parallels with Sibel's case couldn't be clearer. As 60 Minutes first reported (youtube) in 2002, and Vanity Fair later reported, the Turkish Embassy was directing a lot of the heroin trafficking activity - in conjunction with people at the ATC.
"Sibel also recalled hearing wiretaps indicating that Turkish Embassy targets frequently spoke to staff members at the A.T.C.And just as the UK Foreign Office silenced anyone in the UK who tried to speak out, Sibel says:
[]
In her secure testimony, Edmonds disclosed some of what she recalled hearing... Many (calls) involved an F.B.I. target at (Chicago's) large Turkish Consulate... Some of the calls reportedly contained what sounded like references to large scale drug shipments and other crimes."
The Department of State is easily the most corrupted of the major government agencies.Elsewhere, Sibel says:
[]
In some cases where the FBI stumbles upon evidence of high-level officials being involved in drug-smuggling, they're even prevented from sharing it with the DEA [Drug Enforcement Agency]. The Department of State just comes in and says, "Leave it."
"For years and years, information and evidence being collected by the counterintelligence operations of certain U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies has been prevented from being transferred to criminal and narcotics divisions, and from being shared with the Drug Enforcement Agency and others with prosecutorial power. Those with direct knowledge have been prevented from making this information available and public by various gag orders and invocation of the State Secrets Privilege. Why?"Pay attention here, because the ATC is where the worlds of the MIC and the heroin trafficking collide. One of the key Turkish interfaces at the ATC is the Turkish Generals - people that Giraldi says own a stake in the companies through which the military spending is channeled. As described earlier, these exact same people, the Turkish Deep State, also control much of the global heroin market. In between the MIC and the heroin traffickers - are the "neoconservatives (who) distort US foreign policy and enrich themselves at the same time."
One of the difficulties in trying to unravel the Sibel Edmonds case is that we aren't sure where one case ends and another begins. We know that some of the wiretaps were from the ATC, and some from the Turkish embassy in DC, and some from the embassy in Chicago. We also know that many of the wiretaps involve conversations between the embassies and the ATC.
Some of the wiretaps relate to drug trafficking, some relate to the nuclear black market and other weapons trafficking, and some refer to terrorist activity - including 9/11.
Perhaps it's not surprising, then, when she says:
You have the same players when you look into these activities at high-levels you come across the same players, they are the same people.Those 'same people' - at least on the American side - according to Giraldi, appear to be Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Marc Grossman, Eric Edelman, and Stephen Solarz. It appears that we can also add William Cohen and Joseph Ralston - and Dennis Hastert - to that roster, and I'm sure there are a few more that haven't yet been publicly identified.
If what Sibel says is true, and her claims are all backed by documents and wiretaps, and also backed up by other agents who have filed similar complaints, and are ready and willing to testify. All of these people should be in jail. For a long, long time.
Congress must hold hearings to get to the bottom of these crimes. If you agree, please call Congress, today, and demand public, open hearings.
Contact Information
Congressman Henry Waxman (contact page)
(Those calling Waxman's office should ask for Michelle Ash & David Rapallo.)
In Washington, D.C.
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
In Los Angeles
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)
House Government Reform Committee (contact page)
By Mail or Phone:
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-5051
Please also contact Congressman John Conyers, asking him to support hearings by Chairman Waxman.
(Those calling Conyers' office should ask for Elliot Mintzberg.)
Email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
Washington, DC
2426 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Sibel Edmonds & Abuse of the State Secrets Privilege
As part of our campaign this week to call for hearings into Sibel Edmonds case, here is an article by Professor Bill Weaver of the NSWBC about the need for hearings on State Secrets Privilege and why Sibel Edmonds' case is the best way to demonstrate the abuse of the State Secrets Privilege.
Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126 - demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege.
Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126 - demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege.
The Need for Hearing on State Secrets Privilege
By William Weaver
Introduction:
The state secrets privilege is ripe for a hearing. The NSA surveillance cases, extraordinary rendition cases of Maher Arar and Khalid el-Masri, the recent assertion of the privilege by the New York Times in a defamation case, and numerous other uses of the privilege have constantly been in the news for the last couple of years. But I want to explain why the Committee on Government Reform should hold the hearing and the reasons that focusing on Sibel’s case is the best way to open up this issue.
To begin, let me give a little background. The state secrets privilege did not exist in United States law until 1953, when the U.S. Supreme Court decided U.S. v. Reynolds. Prior to that case there were really only two cases that bear on the issue in any serious way. The first was the trial of Aaron Burr for treason and the second was Totten v. U.S. Neither of these cases were state secrets cases. The term “state secrets” is mentioned in the Burr case, but there was never a refusal to provide documents to the court based on grounds of national security. Indeed, President Jefferson handed over the requested documents. Louis Fisher of the Library of Congress has made a careful examination of this case, concluding that it was not a state secrets matter.
Totten concerned a contract for spy services engaged in by one William Lloyd for the Lincoln administration. The executor of Lloyd’s estate sued for breach of contract, and the Supreme Court created an exception in recovery on contract where the service contracted for by the federal government included spying. Until Reynolds, when it was assumed to be subsumed by the state secrets privilege, Totten was merely treated as an exception to recovery on breach of contract.
In Reynolds, the Court adopted a rule of evidence from English common law during the height of the Cold War and applied it to federal courts. It explicitly created a secrecy privilege, but the case shows little evidence of serious thought on the part of the majority. The opinion, a 6-3 ruling, is only a few pages long with Justices Black, Frankfurter and Jackson dissenting. So why is this such a big deal and deserving of a hearing?
Need for Hearing:
First, the adoption of the state secrets privilege created enormous power in president. This power did not come from the Constitution, but from a common law rule of evidence adopted by six members of the U.S. Supreme Court. The privilege has never been approved by Congress. Congress debated codification of the privilege in Federal Rule of Evidence 509 in the late 1960s and early 1970s, but the proposed rule failed.
Presidents used the privilege sparingly up to the mid-1970s, but use has accelerated dramatically since the Carter presidency. Emboldened by a lack of congressional interference and undue deference paid to the privilege by courts, the privilege is no longer solely referred to as a common law based evidentiary privilege – it is now characterized by the executive branch as an inherent Article II power. Presidents have seized on a rule of evidence and transformed it into an executive prerogative.
Second, the claimed constitutional basis for plenary presidential control of national security information, unchallenged by Congress, makes effective oversight of much executive branch activity nigh impossible. Presidents have claimed for at least the last thirty years that control of national security information is constitutionally committed to the presidency and to no other branch of government. But with the expansion of governmental secrecy comes a concomitant diminution of congressional power to check executive branch abuses of authority. Congress has denuded its oversight authority by abnegating any power over the creation, use, and access to national security information. Congress has the authority to adopt statutes affecting and changing the Federal Rules of Evidence, and therefore has the power and the duty to circumscribe abuse of the state secrets privilege. While such proposals directly affecting the Federal Rules of Evidence would need to originate either with the federal judiciary or the judiciary committees, it is well within the purview of Government Reform to examine the way the privilege affects oversight and what may be done to correct misuse of the privilege. Government Reform has oversight authority concerning expenditure of public funds and the legality and felicity of agency actions with respect to federal civil service matters.
Third, the state secrets privilege is at the heart of the executive branch’s claims to control of classified information. If Congress wants to reclaim authority for oversight of abuses that occur in national security venues, or even just wants to send a message of a shift away from past acquiescence, this is the place to start.
Sibel Edmonds’ Case is the Avenue to Open Up This Issue:
Sibel Edmonds’ case is the best case to orient the hearing. This is not a self-serving argument, for there are several features in Sibel’s case that are not present in other cases. Other cases should be presented and analyzed at any hearing, but Sibel’s case should be the anchor.
First, unlike other cases, much of the background of Sibel Edmonds’ case has been made public. The facts concerning most state secrets cases remain secret. Indeed, one can expect the executive branch to exert pressure to have a hearing on the privilege quelled for reasons of national security. But Edmonds’ case is more of an open book than other cases, due to the extensive media coverage it received.
Second, Edmonds’ has the rare distinction of having had her claims corroborated by an inspector general. The Department of Justice Inspector General report in her case is a slam dunk in her favor. I cannot think of any other case involving the state secrets privilege where such a thing has occurred.
Third, Edmonds’ case is “fresh” – it occurred during the present administration and highlights the abuses of authority taken by Bush administrators.
Fourth, the use of the privilege in Sibel Edmonds’ case reached ridiculous heights. Her date of birth, the languages she speaks, and where she went to school, for example, were all covered by the privilege with the express approval of a federal judge. Things she could discuss at a Starbucks over coffee were prohibited from being given in evidence.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
David Swanson and Sibel
Below is a terrific interview with David Swanson of AfterDowningStreet and Sibel Edmonds conducted yesterday.
Sibel promises that Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Dennis Hastert, and Marc Grossman (and others) will be thrown in jail, for treason, if we can persuade Henry Waxman to hold hearings into her case.
Sibel:
transcript (emphasis mine)
We're going to have more on this case every day this week. Please call the offices, and please check back in tomorrow. And the next day.
-----------------------
Contact Information
Congressman Henry Waxman (contact page)
(Those calling Waxman's office should ask for Michelle Ash (Michelle.Ash@mail.house.gov) & David Rapallo.)
In Washington, D.C.
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
In Los Angeles
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)
House Government Reform Committee ( contact page)
By Mail or Phone:
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-5051
Please also contact Congressman John Conyers, asking him to support hearings by Chairman Waxman.
( Those calling Conyers' office should ask for Elliot Mintzberg.)
Email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
Washington, DC
2426 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
-----------------------------------
Other Sibel-related news in the Left Blogistan this week:
* The wonderful Mike Mejia: It's Time for Congress to Hold Public Hearings. Justice for Sibel Edmonds
* The wonderful Mizgin: Deep State Secrets Privilege
* The wonderful Scott Horton: "An Open Letter to Chris Matthews"
* Scott Horton: Sibel Edmonds’s Story - An interview with Luke Ryland (aka, ummm lukery)
* Scott Horton: "New Whistleblowers Back Sibel. An Interview With Sibel Edmonds and James Bamford"
* Chris Floyd: "Sucker Punch: The Heart of Darkness in the Libby Case"
* David Jenkins: "Sibel Edmonds: Sorry, No Room on the MSM"
* WinterPatriot: Let Sibel Edmonds Speak!
* Liberty Coalition: "The Sibel Edmonds Case and Goverment Criminality" (an interview with me, 30mins)
* Expert Witness Radio: "Luke Ryland on the Sibel Edmonds case" (another interview - 60 mins)
-----
threads
dkos
du
please go rec, kick etc.
Sibel promises that Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Dennis Hastert, and Marc Grossman (and others) will be thrown in jail, for treason, if we can persuade Henry Waxman to hold hearings into her case.
Sibel:
"...take that two minutes, maybe less than two minutes, and call Chairman Waxman, and remind him that he's the Chairman, there's no obstacle.Sibel asks (and I beg) that, today, you call Waxman (202-225-3976 ) and Conyers (202-225-5126) and demand open public hearings into Sibel's case.
This case is not allegation, it's not a case that needs to be investigated, that has already been done. Even the Dept of Justice's own Inspector General's Office has put out a report vindicating the case. We have had bipartisan congressional statements saying that this is credible, and absolutely confirming it. So this is not taking something that is unknown. He's the Chairman, he has the power, there's nothing that stands in his way, this is a confirmed case, let's see some justice and accountability."
transcript (emphasis mine)
Swanson: This is David Swanson with Sibel Edmonds. It's great to talk with you, thanks for being here.
Edmonds: Thanks for asking me for this interview, David.
Swanson: So I should ask, I guess, before I start, are you under any gag order? Are there things that you can and cannot talk about?
Edmonds: Well - that's a very interesting question, David, because when the government invoked the State Secrets Privilege, it was specifically for the court procedures, so there won't be any court hearings, and as far as the courts are concerned, my case is gagged and classified.
Separately, they invoked the retroactive classification order on Congress and this was for the Senate Judiciary committee in May 2004 - and the way the imposed this gag order - and I have to emphasize that this gag order was illegal, because in order for them to retroactively classify congressional investigations, the Attorney General for the Justice Department had to meet three criteria and he did not. But even though the gag order was illegal, at that time in May 2004, the Senate Judiciary committee complied with it, they complied with an illegal gag order.
But I've never had a gag order placed on me as far as the public statements, or any other investigative procedures are concerned, but as you know they have declared everything in my case, including my languages, and what I did for the FBI, classified. Now the question is whether this classification that they're using is even legal, or justified. As you know the executive branch has complete control over the classification.
Swanson: So you are not allowed to discuss what languages you speak? You're forbidden to say that?
Edmonds: Well - that's what they have ordered, and that's what the court has actually ruled in their favour - but the interesting this is if you were to go and just google my name, you will see everywhere that my language skills are all listed there - because it's public information. I mean, take a look at the implications of this, based on this classification, I can't even have my resume out there because when you put your resume, and you put your language skills, that would be violating classification. But my resume has been out there, and the government has not come to me and told me to pull my resume.
They have been playing this game because they can get away with it in court, and Congress - but as you can see, this information is readily available - it's public. The same thing is true with my university degrees - the government specifically declared my Masters degrees, my undergraduate degrees, and the topics of those studies as classified! This is the Kafkaesque thing that I have been trying to point out to people, and we haven't had much media attention on this - when they can go, in this ridiculous way, in this ludicrous way, to invoke 'privilege' and classification - even on information that is readily available in public.
Swanson: For those who still don't know what your story is, and what you did, and why the government would be taking these sorts of actions, why don't start at the beginning and just go very briefly, but maybe if I say a couple of things, tell me if I’m wrong...
You were hired by the FBI just after September 11 when they decided that it would be a good idea to hire translators who knew foreign languages - and the foreign languages that you were hired to work on were Turkish, Farsi, and Azerbaijani. And your background is one of having lived in Iran, Turkey and the US - and having had struggles in those previous countries with repressive governments and censorship and corruption and having thought, somewhat hopefully, about the US when you came here as being a country of freedom and transparent government. Am I on the right track?
Edmonds: Absolutely. I was a believer and I took my citizenship oath in 1995, I really took that oath, as you take any oath, seriously, and I was so proud to become a citizen of this country and have the constitution, and all the principles, and the Bill of Rights applying to me. As you know, those rights are non-existent in countries such as Turkey and Azerbaijan and Iran - in most places in the world, people are not even allowed to write about those rights, forget about even demanding them.
Swanson: What made you inclined to take a job with the FBI as a translator?
Edmonds: There needs to be a brief explanation - three years before I took that job, I was doing my studies in forensic science and criminal justice, and I had applied for an internship position with the FBI, not a full time or permanent job position, and at that point they were interested in my language skills, but they basically messed it up. I sent them the application, I took the polygraph test for that internship position for their language department, and somehow in 1999 they lost all that information - not only mine, but from 150 other applicants they had for language specialist positions. These documents, these files were lost within the FBI - or at least that's the explanation they gave to these applicants.
And then the 911 terrorist event took place and I'd turn on the TV and kept hearing the Director of the FBI pleading for language specialists - especially for the languages that I speak - because they were desperate for language specialists. And at that point it was a duty to go and say "Look - I have these skills, you need these skills for the nation, and I'm offering it to you." So I took this position as a contract language specialist for those languages and my top secret clearance was issued and I started working five days after 911.
Swanson: And they were in pretty bad shape, right? How many skilled translators of Turkish materials did they have at that point?
Edmonds: At that point they had no Turkish language specialists... In fact, they had an unofficial division for years, and they had people coming, on and off, from DOD, or the State Department on loan, and working on certain projects, but they did not even have a formal division for Turkish. They had a small division for Arabic language, and they also had a large division for Farsi - the language spoken in Iran.
As you know, because of the Cold War, most of the emphasis was placed on Russian languages - so they had a very large division for the Russian language. Since 1991, the need was not as great for those languages, and they never fortified the other divisions - so they had a lot of Russian translators, and a lot of Chinese translators, very few Arabic language specialists, and a mid-size Farsi department.
And more than the size, and this is quantity-vs-quality, the department was not even managed, because the solid good working people (at the FBI) are mainly agents, but the language division is not managed by the agents - that division, for all these languages, is managed by administrative people. These people are former language specialists who have been promoted to supervisory positions who oversee the language division, and you have no direct involvement from the agents - so you have this layer of administrative people blocking the interaction between the agents and the language specialists. The second reason is that the language division is considered the most classified and sensitive unit in the entire FBI - so the clearance we had, and the access we had, was far more sensitive than the agents'. So even when an agent wanted to come to the division and work for a few minutes with a particular language specialist, that agent had to be escorted to the division, and watched, because everything is managed on a 'need-to-know' basis, and let's say an agent is coming to that division to talk with a Turkish language specialist, he may be exposed to some other information from, let's say, the Chinese counter-intelligence, or Arabic, for let's say Saudi Arabia. And they didn't want that to take place, so there was this great separation between the agents and the language specialists - and that itself brought a lot of problems with it - because you had these bureaucratic layers in the middle and the agents were very frustrated because they wanted to work directly with the language specialists.
You know, a lot of people consider the language specialists as like a clerical job, but you need to realize, when the information comes and you’re looking at all sorts of intelligence, whether it's counter-intelligence or criminal, related to all these different languages and countries, the first people exposed to it are the language specialists. Before that information gets transferred to agents or analysts, the first person who sees it is the language specialist in charge of that particular language - and that language specialist is in a position to decide whether or not, this particular piece of information, whether it's a wiretap or document, is important enough to be translated, whether or not it should be translated verbatim - in detail, or just a summary translation. So by the time that information goes to an analyst or an agent, it has already gone through this filter of the language specialist. So not only do they need to have language skills, linguistic skills, the translators also need to have training and enough information and knowledge to be able to make that decision in terms of what is important, and not, what is urgent, and not urgent.
Swanson: There's a saying in Italian "Tradutorre traditore" which means "The translator is a traitor" - which is something that poets and authors think - and this gives new meaning to that phrase. If you have someone in that position who is not doing their job, who has other interests and loyalties, they're in a position of enormous power because no-one else has seen, or can understand the information that has come in.
So you took this job 5 days after 911 and you were not translating newspapers and public materials, so we can hope that someone at the State Department was doing that - you were translating wiretapped calls, transcripts and so forth, and by March of 2002 you were fired. Why were you fired? What happened in between?
Edmonds: Well - I'll try to answer that briefly, because so much information is already available on the net, in various publications that have come out that basically summarize the issues that I reported
Swanson: Ok - what's the best place for people to go?
Edmonds: They can go to my website - www.justacitizen.com - and there are plenty of documents there, both official documents and various interviews etc summarizing the case and there are court documents there.
But if I were to summarize the 3 or 4 general areas that I reported in terms of the serious problems... One had to do with, and this took place almost within the first two months I was there, that had to do with information related to counter-terrorism division dealing mainly with the 911 terror attacks - and in order to deal with it, not only did it deal with information available after 911, but the agents and the divisions went and actually retrieved a lot of documents and wiretap conversations - some of them dating back to 1999/2000 - on various suspects, or people they believed maybe were suspects.
So they wanted to review a lot of things that took place even before 911. So you were not only dealing, after 911, with information that started coming in, or being obtained after the terrorist attack, but a lot of information that either was translated - verbatim or in many cases summary translations - or things that were maybe overlooked that were retrieved, again from the archives, and this was a decision made by the higher-ups, and for some of those materials to be reviewed again to see what was missed, or what was not translated correctly etc.
Swanson: But you clearly came upon things that the FBI did not want to see made public - would have found embarrassing. Things that you made public to the extent that you were able, that things were poorly translated, things were missed, things were done wrong, and you reported to higher-ups that you had colleagues who were not doing their work properly.
Edmonds: Correct - and, again, there were two categories involved. In some cases it was either intentional or unintentional, unintentional due to incompetence - certain information that was not translated before 911 or they were translated inaccurately. And I also emphasize intentional cases that I reported.
The second category (of things that I reported) was other information that was available and there were significant issues, significant cases, that were not pursued because of 'certain diplomatic relations' and this is something that a lot of people have a hard time understanding, and that is, selective selection of information. That is, let's say certain information came from, let me give you a hypothetical example, let's say it came from Iraq, or certain Iraqi individuals, you can bet that would be processed because of the Axis of Evil Doctrine by our President
Swanson: Whereas Saudi Arabia is 'less evil', for example?
Edmonds: Absolutely! Or you would have in certain cases, there were certain cases that you had several individuals or entities from different nations, let's say, Pakistan, or Turkey, or Israel - and that information, due to pressure by the State Department, they were not transferring that information from counter-intelligence (they were obtained under counter-intelligence, ok) - to the counter-terrorism division - even though they were relevant, extremely relevant, directly relevant.
So the agents were very frustrated because, another thing your listeners hopefully will grasp here, when we say 'the FBI' it's not the entire FBI. All the agents that I worked with, they were great individuals, they were patriotic, they were as frustrated as I was - and they were outraged that these layers from the Pentagon, and the State Department, that they were interfering with their investigations - because automatically they had the right, the obligation, to transfer that information that they obtained from counter-intelligence, let's say, involving money laundering tied to some terrorist activities, by let's say, Turkish individuals, or some Pakistani individuals, or entities here in the US (whether official governmental related entities, or others) - to counter-terrorism to be pursued because they considered the relationship with Pakistan and Turkey too sensitive and they didn't want to mess it up.
Swanson: And so when you ran up against these issues - facts that you thought important that were being covered over, you went higher and higher up, correct? And so you spoke with people like Deputy Assistant Attorney General, or the Director of the FBI - did you ever get anywhere? And how high did the problem go?
Edmonds: You are right on target, because again, there's this misconception out there. People think 'OK, a whistleblower sees some wrongdoing and they just jump out there and go to the media and leak the information.' I spent 3.5-4 months - first I went to my supervisors, but they were a part of the problem. Then I went above them, I went to the division chief, then I went to the FBI headquarters, I went all the way up to the Director - Director Mueller. And I filed these issues, and when I filed them, I filed them with the supporting documents. - it was not me saying 'This is what I think is happening.' Because it was within the FBI, I was presenting them - let's say there were certain forms, certain documents - to the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility - OPR - and the amazing thing that took place was, immediately I started seeing this reaction to it towards me.
First, the FBI management accused me of having gone to congress, and disclosing this information to congress, and I had not done so at that point. I didn't believe that I needed to go to Congress at that point. They did not believe me - they said 'we are suspicious that you have been communicating with congress on these classified issues and doing this via email communication' - so I had agents coming to my house and removing my home computer - my husbands computer - without a warrant! They took it, and then took it to pieces, and they didn’t find anything - and so I said 'OK - maybe it was a misunderstanding.' Two weeks later they issued an order for me to take a polygraph test, and the polygraph test was to determine whether I had gone to Congress. Their fear was not the classification, the fear was whether this was going outside the FBI - and I passed the polygraph because I had not gone to congress at that point. Then they started removing my jobs, and as you know, finally I was terminated, and during these 3-4 months, I presented them with these 3 or 4 different categories of very important issues.
The other important case (that I reported on), had to do with certain public officials, corruption cases, that the FBI had obtained - and again, this was the operation that was taking place between 1997 and 2002 - and I’m talking about solid evidence. And these officials are high-profile public officials.
Swanson: People as high as say Congressman Denny Hastert?
Edmonds: Well, that information has been public, with the Vanity Fair article, and he was only one of the people, at least from the elected officials side - one of several. And they had at least 2 or 3 people in the Pentagon (ed: Feith and Perle), and they had at least one person in the State Department (ed: Marc Grossman) - and they had this documented information, evidence, on these people actually not serving the interests of the United States - and giving out extremely sensitive information to other...
Swanson: To Turkey.
Edmonds: Well, when you say "Turkey" - not necessarily the government of Turkey that we consider an ally, but to entities that who are driven by certain interests - many of them financial interests that have to do with the military industrial complex - and they had this information, and those same individuals - not the ones from Congress necessarily, but the ones from the State Dept and Pentagon. (ed: Perle, Feith, Grossman)
They were not only doing it with one country - because that operation was the sister operation of another investigation that dealt with Israel, but the FBI was not translating these from counter-intelligence to investigation units, and they were supposed to do that. They were supposed to transfer and let the counter-espionage unit in the FBI, and the criminal division handle it. But they were not (transferring these cases). So this was another case that I reported internally - and I never got anywhere with it as far as the FBI was concerned - and later, of course, when Ashcroft came out and invoked the State Secrets Privilege, Ashcroft himself inadvertently explained it! There is a sentence there saying "The State Secrets Privilege is being invoked in order to protect certain sensitive diplomatic relations and business relations of the US" - this is an exact quote from Ashcroft, explaining why the State Secrets Privilege was invoked.
Swanson: Right! 'Business relations' as though the US is a business... It's amazing to me that you put one honest person in the FBI for a few months and they end up reporting a number of different scandals and failures, and it makes you wonder what goes on the rest of the time.
And the story of what happened, you sued, and they got it thrown out on grounds of 'State Secrets' - from what I've read there have been threats to your family, a suspect colleague of yours has left the country effectively with the result that they can't be called to testify, and I guess at least some of the allegations that you've made have been confirmed, if not made public, by the Inspector General at the Justice Dept who said that you were basically fired in retaliation - is that right?
Edmonds: Absolutely, and the most amazing aspect of it is, let's say you have a Justice Dept and the FBI who is willy-nilly invoking this privilege to cover-up criminal wrongdoings, but then you have these judges in the Federal Court, due to this fear of 'Oh, I'm going to be violating some classification and helping the terrorists' or for whatever reasons, going along with it, and this happened in the lower court, it happened in the appellate court.
I don't know if you remember this, but during the appellate court hearings, these three judges closed the court to the public and the media, and after we argued our case, when the ACLU was representing my case before the appellate court, and then it was the government's attorneys turn to argue their case, they asked us, the plaintiffs - my attorneys and I - to step out of the courtroom because we couldn’t even hear what argument the government had! I mean, how can you argue in court against something that you don't even know what it is? So this is the Kafkaesque aspect of it, and what our country has come down to.
Swanson: And you're not a prisoner in Guantanamo - you're an employee of the FBI! Not that they shouldn’t have these rights either. This is the throwing out of the right to stand and hear the evidence against you that's been part of American and British justice for hundreds of years.
Edmonds: It's more than that, David. They are doing it to an American citizen. What made me really outraged was the fact that nobody in the media really reported on this. Here is an American citizen, not a terrorism suspect - and yes, they are misusing that big time, and it's against all sorts of human-rights principles that we are supposed to have here - but the fact that they are doing it to an American citizen, not someone who is a suspect in a criminal case, or terrorism case, this is an American citizen who is being deprived of her due process and her Fourth Amendment, and nobody in the media picked it up. The implications of this, now they are doing it successfully, unfortunately, to American citizens. What does it say about where we are today as a nation? And the disregard they have to the Bill of Rights, and our constitution?
Swanson: And information that the FBI made public, or gave to Congress, they classified that retroactively right? They went back and decided we should make this stuff classified after it was out there! Is there any possible respectable explanation for that kind of secrecy?
Edmonds: Absolutely not. In fact, later on in court, and this is the Project on Government Oversight - POGO - they sued the Justice Dept and they said "No. This information was available for two years. More than 30,000 websites have already downloaded it. How could you classify something that has been out there for two years?" Later, the FBI conceded and they didn't go through the lawsuit, they said 'Fine - you can publicize it.'
Despite that fact, the Senate Judiciary Committee, the congress, still didn't put those documents back online, they are still afraid to put it out there. That is the part that is so mindboggling - which brings us to another important point. I went to Congress, I went to the appropriate committees, the Senate Judiciary committee and later I went to Congressman Waxman's committee - that's the Government Reform Committee - and I observed the classification rules, I went inside the SCIFs - these are the secured facilities they have where they can receive classified information where you can present them with documents, and details, and file numbers etc. Initially, we had Senator Grassley and Senator Leahy, a Democrat and a Republican - this was in the summer of 2002. These two senators, together, came out publicly and they said 'We started investigating this case, we have already interviewed the FBI officials, they confirmed all her allegations to us, and she's 100% credible. We need to turn the FBI upside down' - and this comment that 'We need to turn the FBI upside down' was made by Senator Grassley on CBS 60 Minutes, with 5+ million people watching.
Swanson: And what was the follow through?
Edmonds: Nothing. Initially, they promised that there would be this major public hearing, they were going to bring these witnesses - because I'm not the only witness. Some of these people's names are not public because they haven't come out to blow the whistle publicly, but they have to congress and the Justice Dept Inspector General's office filing exactly the same reports that I filed. They started doing this in 2002 in April, May.
Swanson: Are some of them still employed?
Edmonds: Some of them are retired - and you're looking at veteran FBI agents who were in charge of these operations. They want to testify under oath, they want to testify publicly, and they have filed these reports. So we got the promise from Congress that there will be a hearing, these agents will testify, they will bring in the bad guys from the FBI and have them testify under oath - and then, nothing. A deafening silence.
Swanson: A lot of Americans expected that of the Republican Congress. We've now had 2.5 months of a Democratic Congress, with Senator Leahy now the Chairman. Now Senator Leahy can do more than just write letters and complain about Senator Grassley - what has the difference been? What change have you seen?
Edmonds: Well, we are hoping to see the change. Let me first do the distinction between the Senate and the House. With the Senate, even though we have had Democrats gaining the Majority, we haven't had almost any support from almost any Senate offices. Unfortunately, somebody like Senator Feingold, who I respect tremendously, he's not on the appropriate committee - but you're looking at Senator Leahy, you're looking at Senator Akaka, they are still acting as though they are being repressed there - and they don't want to touch these issues. And of course, you know, people like Senator Clinton - and there are so many of them, and again, it's mind-boggling how these people, after getting the voters who said 'We need change,' they're not doing what they were asked to do - the reason they got re-elected, or some of them who got elected.
In the House we have a little bit more positive situation because we have some great individuals, people who I respect tremendously, Chairman Conyers, and Chairman Waxman, who have already started fairly well, and again it remains to be seen with some of the issues. I'm still hoping that they will do more, but at least we have had some positive response. We’ve got a hearing for whistleblowers through congressman Waxman's office and congressman Waxman's committee - the Government Reform Committee - introduced one of the best, I would say the only good legislation to protect whistleblowers which will include national security whistleblowers - from the agencies like the FBI, NSA, CIA etc. We are so thankful for that - but when it comes to my case, because it is so controversial, because it is so packed with damning information, they have not been willing - and this is specifically congressman Waxman's office - the Government Reform Committee - to come out publicly and commit to this hearing.
And there is nothing, David, nothing that stops them - they have subpoena power, they don't even need to use it a lot because there are so many agents, and I have their names, and they are willing to go and testify under oath. We have been asking congressman Waxman to come out publicly and say 'We are going to hold this public hearing' - and I’m going to emphasize the word 'public' - I have had closed hearings which act like these black holes - you go there and you give the information and nothing happens. This information belongs to the American public and until that happens we won't find out about some unbelievable criminal activities that are taking place within our government agencies.
So last week we started this public action campaign that you're aware of, and I'm very thankful to your website because you published that and you have been one of the supporters and you have signed on to this petition. We have 30 organizations - and this is transpartisan, David. We have the ACLU, OMB Watch, Project on Government Oversight, GAP (Government Accountability Project), National Coalition against Censorship, OpenTheGovernment.org - we have people from the right, we have libertarian organizations like Liberty Coalition, we have People For the American Way, your organization. Thirty major organizations have come together and put together this petition, serving congressman Waxman and his committee - and this happened last week - saying 'We want you to have open, public hearings on this case' - not about the whistleblower being fired - about what were the issues that were being covered up, and are still covered up, and (calling) other agents and other witnesses to testify so we can take this information to the American public and we'll see some accountability.
And so far we have received no response, David. We have 15000 citizens who have signed this petition, we have 30 major organizations, we have had hundreds if not thousands of people calling in the past few days, and we are still waiting to hear from Chairman Waxman's office to publicly say that 'Yes, we are going to hold these public hearings,' and have these witnesses, these veteran agents, these high level FBI people who are willing to testify, to testify. We want to introduce these documents that have no information that is 'state secrets' or that will hurt our national security - but information that will let the public know that here we have appointed officials and elected officials who are out there engaged in treason!
Now, some people may consider the way I'm characterising this as maybe outrageous, or an exaggeration, but I don't know what else to call it, David. When you have people, for greed, for money, selling out information, covering up cases, giving out our true State Secrets information to entities - whether or not they're allies, Israel or Turkey or Pakistan - these people are engaged in treason.
And these cases are documented, the files, the wiretaps, go back to 1997, 1998. They are documented, there are documents, there are witnesses and we need to expose these people and we need to see criminal indictments against these people - and it will (happen). All we need is for this hearing to take place, for people to testify, and for the documents to be introduced, then you're going to see criminal indictments against these people.
Swanson: That's extremely well said, and I think it's exactly right. This is the purpose that Congress serves - to hold public hearings, not to issue reports quietly from friendly witnesses, but to use the power of the subpoena, and putting people under oath, and in front of cameras - and this congress has not done this on the fraud that took us into this war, and has not done it on the mis-steps that allowed 911 to occur, and this is what we put a Democratic majority in the there for in hope of, and we have yet to see it.
If people want to get involved and help push for this to happen with your case, how can they do that?
Edmonds: The best thing they can do, and the time to do it is right now because we just released this petition, they were just served last week with this petition signed by 15,000 people and signed by 30 organizations, is for all your listeners to call Congressman Waxman's office, both the committee's office and his personal office, and demand - send letters, call, because calling is effective, send letters and emails, and say 'We want you to come out publicly and commit to his hearing, and have this public hearing take place' because they listen.
Unfortunately we don't have a good, independent mainstream media - otherwise we wouldn't be in this position in the first place, David. You mentioned Iraq, and the illegal war - with all these cases, unfortunately, our mainstream media acted as enablers. They sit in the middle there and they didn’t do what they were supposed to do, they're still not doing it, and they're leaving the public in the dark. So because we don't have the mainstream media we have people like you. We have websites like yours, we have some of these great organisations who are doing it on behalf of the public.
Swanson: And we have some very talented film-makers, I haven’t seen it yet, but who have made a documentary of your story, right?
Edmonds: Yes David - and it's ironic, because here it took these French producers, coming from France, on behalf of this Channel2 French network to put together for a year and a half, these directors and the producers worked on this case to document it. And they also did a lot of investigative work - but they had to come from France to put it in place here on a case, on an issue that implicates US officials, and has implications for the American public. And the Vanity Fair article that you mentioned, that was done by this great reporter, David Rose, who is British, he lives in England - he had to come and do a one year investigation to that piece out, and I don't know what our mainstream media reporters are doing, but we are depending on foreign nations, and other countries, to do what our own mainstream media should be doing here.
And again, as I said, that's why it's up to these organizations, activists like you and your listeners to take that two minutes, maybe less than two minutes, and call Chairman Waxman, and remind him that he's the Chairman, there's no obstacle.
This case is not allegation, it's not a case that needs to be investigated, that has already been done. Even the Dept of Justice's own Inspector General's Office has put out a report vindicating the case. We have had bipartisan congressional statements saying that this is credible, and absolutely confirming it. So this is not taking something that is unknown. He's the Chairman, he has the power, there's nothing that stands in his way, this is a confirmed case, let's see some justice and accountability.
I don't want anything my job, about why I was fired, about why they did these wrongdoings - yes, they did it to me, that is me personally being affected, and it also sends a chilling message to other whistleblowers - but that is secondary. The most important thing is there are individuals who are engaged in acts of treason, okay. People from the State Dept, people from the Pentagon - some of these individuals are already under some quasi-investigations. I mean, we hear things about Douglas Feith, we are hearing things about Richard Perle, but trust me, they are not putting everything that there is out there. Because when you are looking at organizations like the American Turkish Council here, and you see the sister organization is AIPAC. AIPAC helped form the American Turkish Council - look at the board members, look at the people. You will see the same people involved in both fronts, because it is the same operation. And you come across the same individuals over and over again. You know, I don't understand how the case only ended up stopping with Larry Franklin - and I still can't believe that the evidence that they had from the parallel investigation didn't get its way into the court. You need to look at individuals like Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Marc Grossman, Dennis Hastert, and others. And documented evidence they have collected on these people. What are they doing with this information?
Swanson: It's an excellent question. All of those people and more need to be subpoenaed and put under oath, and on camera, and we need to get some information to the public, without which we're not going to have a democracy. So I would encourage everyone to take your suggestion, and call Congressman Henry Waxman, and ask for open, public hearings on this issue. And go to where? The National Security Whistleblowers Coalition website?
Edmonds: If you could publish the information - Luke Ryland has put together an action campaign page with all of that information with Congressman Waxman's office phone number, fax information, email etc. It's a very good website done by Luke Ryland, and I would appreciate it if you would add that information so your listeners can go to that website and also the phone numbers for Chairman Waxman so that they can call and contact, that would be great (see contact details below).
Swanson: We will do that, no question. Thank you very much for taking this time to open some eyes to what still needs to be looked into.
Edmonds: Thank you David, and thank you for everything you have been doing, because as I said, our only basically is you people, us, and those of us who are saying 'Let's defend our country against all enemies - not foreign,, but also domestic' - and that's what you have been doing so we are thankful for everything you have been doing. Thank you.
We're going to have more on this case every day this week. Please call the offices, and please check back in tomorrow. And the next day.
-----------------------
Contact Information
Congressman Henry Waxman (contact page)
(Those calling Waxman's office should ask for Michelle Ash (Michelle.Ash@mail.house.gov) & David Rapallo.)
In Washington, D.C.
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
In Los Angeles
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)
House Government Reform Committee ( contact page)
By Mail or Phone:
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-5051
Please also contact Congressman John Conyers, asking him to support hearings by Chairman Waxman.
( Those calling Conyers' office should ask for Elliot Mintzberg.)
Email: John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
Washington, DC
2426 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
-----------------------------------
Other Sibel-related news in the Left Blogistan this week:
* The wonderful Mike Mejia: It's Time for Congress to Hold Public Hearings. Justice for Sibel Edmonds
* The wonderful Mizgin: Deep State Secrets Privilege
* The wonderful Scott Horton: "An Open Letter to Chris Matthews"
* Scott Horton: Sibel Edmonds’s Story - An interview with Luke Ryland (aka, ummm lukery)
* Scott Horton: "New Whistleblowers Back Sibel. An Interview With Sibel Edmonds and James Bamford"
* Chris Floyd: "Sucker Punch: The Heart of Darkness in the Libby Case"
* David Jenkins: "Sibel Edmonds: Sorry, No Room on the MSM"
* WinterPatriot: Let Sibel Edmonds Speak!
* Liberty Coalition: "The Sibel Edmonds Case and Goverment Criminality" (an interview with me, 30mins)
* Expert Witness Radio: "Luke Ryland on the Sibel Edmonds case" (another interview - 60 mins)
-----
threads
dkos
du
please go rec, kick etc.
ANCA calls for hearings
Another group has released a statement in favour of the hearings into Sibel's case - this time it's ANCA - the Armenian National Committee of America
ANCA JOINS DIVERSE COALITION IN CALLING FOR CONGRESSIONAL
WHISTLEBLOWER HEARINGS ON SIBEL EDMONDS CASE
-- Urges House Oversight Committee to Lift Gag Order on Edmonds;
Investigate Abuse of State Secret Privilege
WASHINGTON, DC -- The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA)
joined a broad cross-section of civil liberties, public policy and human rights groups today in calling on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in Congress to hold public hearings on the case of FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds.
Edmonds, a former FBI Language Specialist, was fired from the FBI after reporting concerns about inferior translations relating to the 9-11 attacks and possible espionage within the agency. The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Inspector General would later confirm many of Edmonds' assertions. However, the DOJ used the State Secrets Privilege to deny her legal recourse and prevent Congress from exploring the matter.
Civil Liberties advocates argue that Edmonds' case is an example of other instances where whistleblowers, who tried to inform Congress and taxpayers about national security threats, were intimidated, silenced, and retaliated against.
A petition to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, signed by thirty prominent groups, including OMB Watch, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Concerned Foreign Service Officers, Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington (CREW), Government Accountability Project (GAP), U.S.-Armenian Public Affairs Committee (USAPAC), Project on Government Oversight (POGO), and the ANCA, was delivered earlier today.
The full text of the petition is provided below.
The Sibel Edmonds Whistleblower case has received broad media attention, including a 10-page expose in the September 2005, issue of "Vanity Fair". According to the article by contributing editor David Rose, Edmonds claimed that FBI wiretaps reveal that the Turkish government and its allies boasted of bribing - with as much as $500,000 the former Speaker of the House of Representatives as
part of an alleged deal to stop consideration of the Armenian Genocide Resolution.
The article cites accounts by Edmonds regarding FBI wiretaps of the Turkish Embassy and Turkish groups such as the American Turkish Council (ATC) and the Assembly of Turkish American Associations (ATAA), including conversations concerning former Speaker Hastert's dramatic reversal on legislation concerning the Armenian Genocide. In October 2000, despite overwhelming Congressional support, Speaker Hastert reversed his initial support and removed the Armenian Genocide resolution (H.Res.596) from the House docket just minutes before the resolution was scheduled for a vote, citing national security concerns by President Clinton.
The American Turkish Council and the ATAA have already registered their opposition to pending Armenian Genocide legislation (H.Res.106), which was introduced by Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA), George Radanovich (R-CA), Congressional Armenian Caucus Co-Chairs Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and Joe Knollenberg (R-MI) and currently has 179 cosponsors. In an interview published in "Today's Zaman" newspaper on February 2, 2007, ATC President James H. Holmes stated that, "Our interest is seeing this resolution defeated, derailed,
delayed. I don't care what the formula is. We want it to fail."
Saturday, March 10, 2007
An Open Letter to Chris Matthews
Scott Horton of Antiwar.com and The Stress Blog has written an Open Letter to Chris Matthews
Dear Sir,Great work, Scott.I am writing you today because I think you and your investigative reporter, David Shuster, are two of the only men on TV news who might have the guts to step up and cover a very important story that is currently suffering from a near-total media blackout.
That blackout is deep enough that it’s likely you haven’t even heard that 2 new FBI whistleblowers have come forward – one named, the other still anonymous – vouching for the veracity of the claims of former FBI contract linguist-turned-whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, who is once again pushing – this time backed by more than thirty public interest groups – for public congressional hearings into her case.
One of these new whistleblowers, a 20-year veteran agent named Gilbert Graham, has revealed in a leaked letter [.pdf] to the Justice Department Inspector General’s office that the intercepts she was involved in translating as part of official FBI investigations into high-profile criminal activity in 2001 and 2002 were themselves illegal wiretaps on some very influential people – begun under authority from Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants when they should have been using the old-fashioned 4th Amendment kind.
I think that makes this story an official double-whammy.
Perhaps this lawbreaking by the investigators is part of why the Justice Department has waged such a battle against this courageous woman’s right of free speech and right to seek redress in court by using (abusing) the “States Secrets Privilege” to prevent her from saying what she learned during her part in the investigation.
Many current and former federal police and intelligence officials, Senators and Congressmen, and the Inspector General himself have vouched for Edmonds’s credibility. No one of significance has challenged her facts, only her right to tell us what they are.
Edmonds told me Wednesday, March 7th, in a joint interview with renowned intelligence reporter James Bamford,
“[I]f Congress moves forward and holds this public hearing, I can guarantee you that you are going to be seeing some major criminal indictments here because we are not talking about light-level stuff – we are talking about very serious criminal activities.”
From what I understand, this may be an understatement.
Why not invite her on your show?
I am certain she will be an energetic and informative guest, and there’s no doubt that your TV cameras will like her too.
Her gag order is severe, but she can say enough to set your man Shuster on the path to the story of a lifetime.
This link is to the .pdf file of the unclassified version of Graham’s letter to the Department of Justice’s Inspector General’s office.
Thanks very much for your time.
Best,
Scott Horton
Friday, March 9, 2007
Congress Must Finally Hold Public Hearings on Edmonds Case
This is a typically terrific new article by Mike Mejia
------------
Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126 - demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege. (Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498)
Do it this afternoon, and again next week - and please ask your friends to do it too.
Congress Must Finally Hold Public Hearings on Edmonds Case
It has been almost five years now since former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds first contacted the Senate Judiciary Committee to reveal the shocking tale of Turkish bribery of high-level U.S. officials. In that time span, Edmonds has been misled by members of Congress on several occasions: Numerous promises have been made to the whistleblower by the Senate Judiciary Committee that her allegations would be exposed in public hearings. Those promises have rung hollow.
Now, with the Democratic victory in Congressional elections, coupled with revelations that many of the tapes she translated were probably obtained illegally through FISA warrants , the Turkish translator's case has gained new relevance. Edmonds recently presented to Congress her petition of 15,000 individual signatures and the support of 30 organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), OMB Watch, Project on Government Oversight (POGO), Government Accountability Project (GAP), People for the American Way, and the Liberty Coalition, who have sponsored this petition and joined her campaign. Furthermore, Edmonds has received assurances that the House Government Reform Committee will hold hearings. And one would hope that with a very good public servant, Henry Waxman, chairing the Government Reform Committee, a full public airing of Ms. Edmonds' allegations would be a foregone conclusion.
Unfortunately, time and time again the Congress has proven that, absent public pressure, a case like that of Turkey's corruption of U.S. government officials will not automatically receive its due attention. And although the Democrats' recent rise to power brings new hope, it won't automatically guarantee justice. Unlike the numerous Iraq War investigations that Waxman and other Democrats in Congress are planning, the issues brought up by Sibel Edmonds may tarnish the images not just of the Bush Administration, but also of certain elements of the Clinton Administration. Further complicating matters is that members of both political parties in Congress were also allegedly the recipient of Turkish gratuities: When a country like Turkey decides to engage in illegal espionage and lobbying, it spreads its funds generously. And though Edmonds' case involves the nuclear black market, not even the potential of a nuke reaching American soil is guaranteed to motivate our public servants, especially when they fear some of the muck might splatter on their own Party.
One must also recall the case of another famous whistleblower from years past to fully understand the former FBI linguist's dilemma. While it is well-known that Daniel Ellsberg 'leaked' the Pentagon Papers to the press in order to expose the lies used to mislead the country into Vietnam, what is not as well known is the fact that Ellsberg first presented this information to representatives of Congress- including hallowed Democrats like William Fulbright. According to Ellsberg, Fulbright and other Democrats in Congress feared bureaucratic retribution from the Nixon Administration and strung Ellsberg along with promises for almost two years. It was only because of the foot dragging by liberal Democrats that Ellsberg was finally forced to go to the New York Times.
In Edmonds' case, even the press might not be much of an option. The mainstream media has continually ignored each shocking new revelation surrounding her tenure at the FBI. To be sure, certain outlets have touched parts of the story, from CBS 60 Minutes' "Lost in Translation" to Vanity Fair's "An Inconvenient Patriot", but I am told many other journalists have sat on information given to them by Edmonds and others. Such information could have blown her case wide open by now. In frustration, Sibel Edmonds has turned to the activists and journalists in the blogosphere in order to build momentum for hearings in the Congress.
She is correct to do so. When all is said and done, exposing Edmonds' charges and curbing the abuse of the state secrets privilege will only happen with grassroots pressure. Simply electing Democrats will not result in uncovering and rooting out this kind of rank corruption in the Executive Branch and Congress. Similarly, electing the right folks has not resulted in a rapid withdrawal from Iraq. The only real hope for making these hearings happen is to follow-up on the Democratic electoral victory by holding the politicians' feet to the fire. As Ellsberg is fond of saying, they may not see the light, but they'll feel the heat.
Let's make them feel the heat.
------------
Please call the offices of Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126 - demanding open hearings into Sibel Edmonds' case and the State Secrets Privilege. (Capitol switchboard number - 800-828-0498)
Do it this afternoon, and again next week - and please ask your friends to do it too.
Air America Radio on the NSWBC & FISA abuse
Thursday, March 8, 2007
National Whistleblower Center's Statement
From the National Whistleblower Center:
The National Whistleblower Center, along with a broad coalition of 30 liberal, libertarian and conservative groups including the American Civil Liberties Union, Citizen Outreach, OMB Watch, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Government Accountability Project, Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Libertiy Coalition, the National Coalition Against the Censorship, the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition and the Project on Government Oversight sent a letter to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform urging prompt hearings on the case of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds.
Ms. Edmonds, a former FBI Language Specialist, brought charges of wrongdoing, criminal activity, cover-ups and national security threats inside the agency following the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Edmonds was promptly fired. The United States Department of Justice Office of Inspector General (OIG) investigated her allegations, and confirmed most of her claims. The OIG concluded that her firing was illegal and that the FBI failed to investigate Ms. Edmonds' credible allegations of security breaches and possible espionage inside the FBI language services division. However, the Attorney General invoked the "State Secrets Privilege," which covered up the FBI's wrongdoing and malfeasance and resulted in the dismissal of Ms. Edmonds' retaliation case. The OIG report is publicly avaliable at http://www.usdoj.gov/oig
/special/0501/index.htm .NWC President, Stephen M. Kohn and NWC General Counsel, David K. Colapinto, issued the following statement in support of the hearings:
"The 'State Secrets' privilege undermines whistleblower protections. Despite the fact that the Department of Justifice's own watchdog agency, the Inspector General, confirmed that Sibel Edmonds had been illegally fired, the government used that alleged 'privilege' to have Ms. Edmonds' case thrown out of court and to cover up FBI wrongdoing. The government abused a 'privilege' to undermine Constitutionally protected free speech and ignore an Inspector General's findings of retaliation. Every national security whistleblower was threatened by this improper assertion of a privilege. The National Whistleblower Center joins in petitioning Congress to place rational limits on this privilege so that national security whistleblowers, such as Ms. Edmonds, can expose serious wrongdoing, free from retaliation."
Stephen Kohn and David Colapinto represented Mrs. Edmonds during the OIG investigation, and witnessed first hand the improper use of the State Secrets privilege in her case.
The petition drive is being coordinated by the Liberty Coalition. In a statement issued by the Coalition's National Director, Mr. Michael Ostrolenk stated: "Mrs. Edmonds is not a national security threat but a national hero and the American public deserves to hear the truth of her case. Congress must act and act now by having public hearings. Without them, the cover-ups and criminal activities will just continue."
Around the blogosphere
William Fisher has a new article out at Truthout about the State Secrets Privilege: New Tests for the Supreme Court
He writes:
Also, a blogger called WinterPatriot has written a post called Let Sibel Edmonds Speak - a good overview of the case, and begging that people call Congress and demand hearings. I join Winter in his begging.
Margie Burns is promising at Bradblog to write more about Sibel, and in particular, the news released earlier in the week with the two agents backing up Sibel's claims.
David Swanson and AfterDowningStreet are on the case too. Thanks for your help, guys.
He writes:
Two of the Bush administration's signature issues may soon face further challenges in the US Supreme Court. In one case, the high court will be asked to review lower court decisions upholding the constitutionality of the Military Commissions Act. In the other, lawyers may contest the government's use of the "state secrets privilege" in a case involving the practice of "extraordinary rendition."
[]
Once rarely used, the state secrets privilege has over the past five years become a routine defense used by the US government to keep cases from being tried.
The privilege is based on a series of US legal precedents allowing the federal government to dismiss legal cases that it claims would threaten foreign policy, military intelligence or national security.
A relic of the Cold War with the former Soviet Union, it has been invoked numerous times since the September 11th, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Judges have denied the privilege on only five occasions.
It was used against Sibel Edmonds, a former Federal Bureau of Investigation translator, who was fired in retaliation for reporting security breaches and possible espionage within the bureau. Lower courts dismissed the case when former Attorney General John Ashcroft invoked the state secrets privilege and the Supreme Court upheld that decision. It has also been used to block legal actions by other "whistle-blowers" who work in the national security field.
The privilege was also invoked to stop the suit brought by Maher Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian citizen who was stopped at New York's John F. Kennedy airport on his way back to Canada from a vacation in North Africa, detained for several days without access to a lawyer or to his family, and then flown to Syria, where he was imprisoned and tortured for 10 months. He was released without charges.
Also, a blogger called WinterPatriot has written a post called Let Sibel Edmonds Speak - a good overview of the case, and begging that people call Congress and demand hearings. I join Winter in his begging.
Margie Burns is promising at Bradblog to write more about Sibel, and in particular, the news released earlier in the week with the two agents backing up Sibel's claims.
David Swanson and AfterDowningStreet are on the case too. Thanks for your help, guys.
Luke on Liberty Coalition Radio
Here's an interview (22mins) I gave yesterday to Liberty Coalition - the organisation that co-sponsored the petition. We discussed Sibel's case, and the petition, and the need for public hearings.
An Interview With Sibel Edmonds and James Bamford
Sibel Edmonds and James Bamford had a great interview with Scott Horton yesterday.
Click here to listen. The full transcript is here.
---------------------------------
Some snippets:
Horton: The first question is for you Sibel: What is the State Secrets Privilege?
Edmonds: The State Secrets Privilege is an executive privilege that is based on common law – it was never turned into a law by Congress – and it was a privilege that was meant to be used rarely. And that was the case up until a few years ago, before this administration came into power. What happens is, this is when the government comes forward when there is litigation in court and says the facts involved in this litigation would hurt certain State-related secrets. They may be military secrets, or intelligence related, and as I said, this privilege has been abused repeatedly in the past five or six years.
[snip]
Horton: Now, Sibel, is it not the case that the secrets that you know would compromise national security if you were to tell us?
Edmonds: Well, no!
Actually this is exactly what my attorneys at the ACLU argue. For example, we had this public report by the Justice Department's own Inspector General's office – they issued an unclassified version of that report which basically vindicated my case – and they wanted to introduce this report into evidence, right, and the government said "No, that is covered by the State Secrets Privilege." Here is a report, a document that is readily available on the website of the Justice Department, but the Justice Department says "We consider it State Secrets Privilege, and classified."
Now, they did the same thing with my languages – the languages I speak, they called the nature of those languages as a State Secrets Privilege. They even went further, they said that where I went to school, and the topics of my university studies, they were all covered by the State Secrets Privilege. In fact, where I was born, and the countries I was raised in, they were all considered State Secrets Privilege, which is just absolutely bizarre!
And what is even more troubling is the fact that three judges in the appellate court agreed with it. Here is a government coming in this Kafkaesque situation, and claiming that my languages, my place of birth and even my date of birth, they were all covered by the State Secrets Privilege. And you have three judges sitting on the bench, saying "Okay – we agree with the government. The entire case, and this information, is considered State Secrets Privilege."
Horton: Well, there's one branch of government left, if one branch is putting State Secrets Privilege on you, and another is upholding it, then all that's left is the U.S. Congress, and I see that you guys have a petition that has come out today, which has signatories from more than 30 organizations – it's quite a list – the ACLU, Citizen Outreach, Office of Management & Budget Watch, EPIC (the Electronic Privacy Information Center), Government Accountability Project, Electronic Freedom Foundation, the National Coalition Against the Censorship, Downsize DC (glad to see them on there), September 11th Advocates, Citizen Outreach... and this petition is demanding hearings in the U.S. House of Representatives, right?
Edmonds: Correct. And it is very good to see that you have these various groups, some of them are active within the Civil Liberties community, others are considered whistleblower organizations, there are organizations that deal with privacy issues, and all of these organizations have come together and they are considering this case as a very important case that needs to have public hearings – because as I said, it's very troubling.
[snip]
So what we want right now is we want to have open, public hearings where we can put witnesses on the stand under oath. There are several veteran agents who are willing, who want to come forward and testify, because I was not the only person who reported these issues. These other agents reported these cases to the Justice Department, Inspector General's office, with the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility, and most of these agents also have gone to the various offices in the Congress. They have gone to Senator Grassley, and Senator Leahy, for the Judiciary Committee, and some of these people have come forward and provided information to Congressman Waxman's office. So we want to have these witnesses stand there and tell the American public, tell the Representatives what really has been happening within these agencies, and the criminal activities that have been taking place there.
[snip]
Horton: Right. Now, in terms of trying to get hearings, I know that you've been as loud as you are allowed to be this whole time in trying to get an official, public investigation so that the American people can find out about this, but now is pretty good timing, it seems like. We have this new FBI agent coming forward, Gilbert Graham, who has made some allegations [.pdf] concerning the very wiretaps that you listened to Sibel.
James, can you tell us a bit of the background of this guy, Gilbert Graham, who he is, and what's important about what he's now finally come out and said publicly?
Bamford: Well, I think he's a very courageous whistleblower. He worked at the FBI in the counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism area and he worked on a very sensitive political investigation involving Turkey, corruption within the Bush administration and people that were dealing with Turkey, and money being passed and so forth. The FBI was investigating this, and he realized that the FBI was asking for warrants that were known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance warrants. These warrants, known as FISA warrants are very easy to get, it doesn't require much in the way of evidentiary information to get them, and they were using those very easy-to-get FISA warrants in order to avoid having to show probable cause to get a regular warrant, a criminal-type warrant.
So he complained to the Inspector General's office that this was illegal, and it is. That was the whole reason that they originally set up those two types of warrants, you have the easier warrants, the FISA warrant, in order to get intelligence information, but if you're trying to look into a criminal case, you need a probable-cause warrant. And the FBI decided to try the easy warrant to avoid going the legal route – so he complained about that and that was a part of the case that Sibel was involved in. What makes it very interesting is the fact that the government used the State Secrets Privilege to try to hide what was going on, which was obviously illegality and used it against Sibel so she couldn't bring any of that illegality out in her case.
Horton: And we see why it's so difficult then, to get this story out, all sides agree to go ahead and use this State Secrets Privilege on her because the FBI agents who have [found] criminality on the part of the people they were investigating, they were breaking the law in order to get that evidence.
Bamford: That's right, that's a criminal violation to try to bypass the legal requirement for getting a warrant, and instead getting a FISA warrant when you're going after a criminal case. So, again, for an FBI agent who's been there for over 20 years, to actually write a letter like that to the Inspector General's office, that's a very big decision, and a lot of times it's a career ending decision – so it requires an awful lot of courage, but it also requires somebody that knows really what's going on and to feel that the American public should know that this is going on. So there's really two elements here – one is the illegality on the part of the FBI by going this route and getting the easier warrant when they should be getting the other one, and the second element is the illegality of the case they were looking into – the fact that there are people involved in the Turkish government, there were people involved in Turkish lobbies, people involved in the Bush administration, high officials in the Bush administration who were getting payoffs, getting money, and that was what the corruption investigation was looking into.
Horton: Wow Sibel, it sure sounds like you stepped into the perfect storm here. Did you have any idea that these wiretaps, these documents that you were translating, that these had come from illegal warrants?
Edmonds: At the time, no! In fact, I did not find out about it until a few months ago when our organization was contacted by several agents. Now we have the name of one of them, and that is Special Agent Gilbert Graham. He retired in 2002, and he filed his complaints with the FBI OPR and the Justice Department Inspector General's office, he went to Senator Grassley's office, he went to Senator Leahy's office a few months before my case became public. It was a few months before Inspector General's office started investigating my case – but I was not aware of the fact at the time, and I found out about it a few months ago, and since then, two other witnesses, and again these are veterans, agents and specialists, who have come forward, providing us with information. They are willing to testify before Congress, but they don't want to become public, they are not after publicity – in fact they're trying to protect their privacy, but they are courageous enough, as Jim mentioned, to say "Look, I'm aware of this, I have documentation, we know other witnesses within the FBI."
And here is another thing, the agents themselves, we're talking about the street level agents, case agents, these are patriotic great guys. So it was not these agents going and violating these rules, but it was taking place within the FBI's administrative headquarters and the higher-ups within the Justice Department. So, no, I did not know about this until a few months ago, and it was a revelation for me, because I was like "Oh, here is one other reason that everybody wanted to cover up this case by invoking the State Secrets Privilege."
Everybody was happy in the end because on one hand you have corrupt congressional representatives – several of them, and they know who they are and they know about this case. Then, you have people in the State Department – you have at least one individual within the State Department – you have two or three individuals within the Pentagon and you also have certain well-known lobbyists. So this was a case where the Justice Department didn't want their own illegal actions, in terms of conducting these wiretap operations, to be known – so they had their own reason of quashing this thing and basically wanting to cover it up via the State Secrets Privilege.
You had the State Department wanting to have it covered up, you had the Pentagon, and then also you had the Congress not having the reason, the motivation – which should be representing the American people and fulfilling their obligations to the American people – not wanting to touch the case because it's a controversial case.
Another troubling aspect of this new case is the fact that we don't know what they did with this information that they obtained illegally. Obviously they did not transfer it to the criminal division to be investigated – so what did they do with this information? Based on what we are getting from our sources, and these are people who have recently left the Bureau, it would not be illogical to actually consider the fact that the Bureau and the Justice Department may be using this information to actually blackmail people within Congress.
Horton: That makes perfect sense, and it reminds of that great article by David Rose in Vanity Fair about your case where he talked to different officials at the FBI and the Congressional Committees that you spoke to in secret session who implicated [former House Speaker] Dennis Hastert receiving suitcases full of cash, bribes, drug money and God-knows-what.
[snip]
Horton: Alright, James Bamford, when I look into this case, I keep finding the names Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, Marc Grossman, and, well, various people close to AIPAC, and what Col. Larry Wilkerson, Colin Powell's former aide, calls "the Cheney cabal" – but in a lot of cases, it seems this story is a lot bigger than just the Cheney cabal, we're talking about widespread corruption from both parties, all different agencies. Your comment?
Bamford: Well, that's exactly right, we're just seeing one tip of the iceberg yesterday with the conviction of Libby and that was one of the rare instances where somebody was actually brought to trial. What we don't see is all the stuff that went on behind the scenes where nobody has been arrested, and nobody has been brought to trial, and that's what the State Secrets Privilege was put in to hide – and a lot of that involved money being passed, and a lot of this has been going on for years, and was being used tremendously by the Republicans who have been very big on supplying money to Turkey and very big on supplying money to people that represent Turkey.
So that's the thing that really needs to be looked into – where is this money going, where is it coming from, who is getting it, how much involvement was there with the former Speaker of the House – how much did Denny Hastert have to do with this? Those are the issues that really could be brought out if they do have a congressional hearing. The court is pretty much out of the picture at this point since Sibel's case has gone all the way to the Supreme Court and it's been turned down. So the next avenue to pursue it is by having a congressional hearing, and now that the Democrats are in power, there's a possibility of having the entire case brought out during a congressional hearing which is something that couldn't have happened during the time when the Republicans were in control of Congress – so that is the next stage, and I hope that's what is going to happen after Sibel's petition has just come out.
[snip]
Horton: Alright, well in the last few minutes here Sibel, why don't you go ahead and explain your group, the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, and call for support, whatever you want.
Edmonds: Okay, well, this petition is going to be posted on all these organizations that have signed on, and you named a few of those organizations, and we have posted it on our website, NSWBC.org – that stands for National Security Whistleblowers Coalition – and in addition, in a few days, we are going to launch this public action campaign, and there will be a website where your listeners, and our supporters, the American public, can go and send this petition Congressman Waxman, Chairman Waxman's office, and urge him to set a date for this hearing and make sure that the hearing is a public hearing, and it's about the case, and to have these witnesses to stand there under oath and testify.
One other thing I would like to mention, and that's what you asked Jim about the fact that this went back to 1996, 97 – you need to realize that these people were not really out of the picture, because during those years, both say, Richard Perle and Douglas Feith, they were registered foreign agents for the government of Turkey and they were actively lobbying on behalf of Turkey. And when I say Turkey, I'm not talking about Turkey the country. Certain elements, the interest groups within Turkey, so you're looking at the same people.
Marc Grossman was the ambassador of Turkey, and then in 1997 he came and took a fairly high-level position in the State Department in 1997 – so Grossman didn't come to his office during this current administration, but he's been there – so you're looking at the same cabal. The fact that their tentacles were within the government agencies, even during those years, and of course, it became that much deeper, and stronger, during this administration is very important to remember.
And so much has been public – and this is why it's important to emphasize the fact that they just can't go willy-nilly and invoke the State Secrets Privilege and hope that the case will go just away. This needs to come out completely, and we need to see some accountability. And if Congress moves forward and holds this public hearing, I can guarantee you that you are going to be seeing some major criminal indictments here because we are not talking about light-level stuff – we are talking about very serious criminal activities.
Horton: That's right. And in fact anybody who wants to really delve into the background of Sibel Edmonds case, please go to Antiwar.com and check the archives for my interview last week of Luke Ryland who is the world's best investigator on this case as far as I can tell.
Edmonds: Yes, he is.
Horton: We're out of time here. Any final closing comments from either of you?
Bamford: I just want to supply my support to Sibel's effort here. I think she's been doing a fantastic job of trying to get this out there, and all the listeners out there, I hope they join in with their support.
Horton: I'd like to add too that the Constitution is far from perfect, but the House of Representatives is un-elected, or re-elected every two years – and that means each of those individual congressmen has to do what their constituents say. If their constituents demand that something happens, they will tend to go along. They will never see the light, but sometimes they can feel the heat – so it is not a pointless task to contact your congressman and pressure them to hold these hearings. This is important stuff.
---------------------------------
I'm with Scott, and Sibel, and Bamford. It's important that we get these hearings, and it's important the we hold Congress' feet to the fire.
Please phone and demand hearings. Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126 (Capitol switchboard - 800-828-0498)
Click here to listen. The full transcript is here.
---------------------------------
Some snippets:
Horton: The first question is for you Sibel: What is the State Secrets Privilege?
Edmonds: The State Secrets Privilege is an executive privilege that is based on common law – it was never turned into a law by Congress – and it was a privilege that was meant to be used rarely. And that was the case up until a few years ago, before this administration came into power. What happens is, this is when the government comes forward when there is litigation in court and says the facts involved in this litigation would hurt certain State-related secrets. They may be military secrets, or intelligence related, and as I said, this privilege has been abused repeatedly in the past five or six years.
[snip]
Horton: Now, Sibel, is it not the case that the secrets that you know would compromise national security if you were to tell us?
Edmonds: Well, no!
Actually this is exactly what my attorneys at the ACLU argue. For example, we had this public report by the Justice Department's own Inspector General's office – they issued an unclassified version of that report which basically vindicated my case – and they wanted to introduce this report into evidence, right, and the government said "No, that is covered by the State Secrets Privilege." Here is a report, a document that is readily available on the website of the Justice Department, but the Justice Department says "We consider it State Secrets Privilege, and classified."
Now, they did the same thing with my languages – the languages I speak, they called the nature of those languages as a State Secrets Privilege. They even went further, they said that where I went to school, and the topics of my university studies, they were all covered by the State Secrets Privilege. In fact, where I was born, and the countries I was raised in, they were all considered State Secrets Privilege, which is just absolutely bizarre!
And what is even more troubling is the fact that three judges in the appellate court agreed with it. Here is a government coming in this Kafkaesque situation, and claiming that my languages, my place of birth and even my date of birth, they were all covered by the State Secrets Privilege. And you have three judges sitting on the bench, saying "Okay – we agree with the government. The entire case, and this information, is considered State Secrets Privilege."
Horton: Well, there's one branch of government left, if one branch is putting State Secrets Privilege on you, and another is upholding it, then all that's left is the U.S. Congress, and I see that you guys have a petition that has come out today, which has signatories from more than 30 organizations – it's quite a list – the ACLU, Citizen Outreach, Office of Management & Budget Watch, EPIC (the Electronic Privacy Information Center), Government Accountability Project, Electronic Freedom Foundation, the National Coalition Against the Censorship, Downsize DC (glad to see them on there), September 11th Advocates, Citizen Outreach... and this petition is demanding hearings in the U.S. House of Representatives, right?
Edmonds: Correct. And it is very good to see that you have these various groups, some of them are active within the Civil Liberties community, others are considered whistleblower organizations, there are organizations that deal with privacy issues, and all of these organizations have come together and they are considering this case as a very important case that needs to have public hearings – because as I said, it's very troubling.
[snip]
So what we want right now is we want to have open, public hearings where we can put witnesses on the stand under oath. There are several veteran agents who are willing, who want to come forward and testify, because I was not the only person who reported these issues. These other agents reported these cases to the Justice Department, Inspector General's office, with the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility, and most of these agents also have gone to the various offices in the Congress. They have gone to Senator Grassley, and Senator Leahy, for the Judiciary Committee, and some of these people have come forward and provided information to Congressman Waxman's office. So we want to have these witnesses stand there and tell the American public, tell the Representatives what really has been happening within these agencies, and the criminal activities that have been taking place there.
[snip]
Horton: Right. Now, in terms of trying to get hearings, I know that you've been as loud as you are allowed to be this whole time in trying to get an official, public investigation so that the American people can find out about this, but now is pretty good timing, it seems like. We have this new FBI agent coming forward, Gilbert Graham, who has made some allegations [.pdf] concerning the very wiretaps that you listened to Sibel.
James, can you tell us a bit of the background of this guy, Gilbert Graham, who he is, and what's important about what he's now finally come out and said publicly?
Bamford: Well, I think he's a very courageous whistleblower. He worked at the FBI in the counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism area and he worked on a very sensitive political investigation involving Turkey, corruption within the Bush administration and people that were dealing with Turkey, and money being passed and so forth. The FBI was investigating this, and he realized that the FBI was asking for warrants that were known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance warrants. These warrants, known as FISA warrants are very easy to get, it doesn't require much in the way of evidentiary information to get them, and they were using those very easy-to-get FISA warrants in order to avoid having to show probable cause to get a regular warrant, a criminal-type warrant.
So he complained to the Inspector General's office that this was illegal, and it is. That was the whole reason that they originally set up those two types of warrants, you have the easier warrants, the FISA warrant, in order to get intelligence information, but if you're trying to look into a criminal case, you need a probable-cause warrant. And the FBI decided to try the easy warrant to avoid going the legal route – so he complained about that and that was a part of the case that Sibel was involved in. What makes it very interesting is the fact that the government used the State Secrets Privilege to try to hide what was going on, which was obviously illegality and used it against Sibel so she couldn't bring any of that illegality out in her case.
Horton: And we see why it's so difficult then, to get this story out, all sides agree to go ahead and use this State Secrets Privilege on her because the FBI agents who have [found] criminality on the part of the people they were investigating, they were breaking the law in order to get that evidence.
Bamford: That's right, that's a criminal violation to try to bypass the legal requirement for getting a warrant, and instead getting a FISA warrant when you're going after a criminal case. So, again, for an FBI agent who's been there for over 20 years, to actually write a letter like that to the Inspector General's office, that's a very big decision, and a lot of times it's a career ending decision – so it requires an awful lot of courage, but it also requires somebody that knows really what's going on and to feel that the American public should know that this is going on. So there's really two elements here – one is the illegality on the part of the FBI by going this route and getting the easier warrant when they should be getting the other one, and the second element is the illegality of the case they were looking into – the fact that there are people involved in the Turkish government, there were people involved in Turkish lobbies, people involved in the Bush administration, high officials in the Bush administration who were getting payoffs, getting money, and that was what the corruption investigation was looking into.
Horton: Wow Sibel, it sure sounds like you stepped into the perfect storm here. Did you have any idea that these wiretaps, these documents that you were translating, that these had come from illegal warrants?
Edmonds: At the time, no! In fact, I did not find out about it until a few months ago when our organization was contacted by several agents. Now we have the name of one of them, and that is Special Agent Gilbert Graham. He retired in 2002, and he filed his complaints with the FBI OPR and the Justice Department Inspector General's office, he went to Senator Grassley's office, he went to Senator Leahy's office a few months before my case became public. It was a few months before Inspector General's office started investigating my case – but I was not aware of the fact at the time, and I found out about it a few months ago, and since then, two other witnesses, and again these are veterans, agents and specialists, who have come forward, providing us with information. They are willing to testify before Congress, but they don't want to become public, they are not after publicity – in fact they're trying to protect their privacy, but they are courageous enough, as Jim mentioned, to say "Look, I'm aware of this, I have documentation, we know other witnesses within the FBI."
And here is another thing, the agents themselves, we're talking about the street level agents, case agents, these are patriotic great guys. So it was not these agents going and violating these rules, but it was taking place within the FBI's administrative headquarters and the higher-ups within the Justice Department. So, no, I did not know about this until a few months ago, and it was a revelation for me, because I was like "Oh, here is one other reason that everybody wanted to cover up this case by invoking the State Secrets Privilege."
Everybody was happy in the end because on one hand you have corrupt congressional representatives – several of them, and they know who they are and they know about this case. Then, you have people in the State Department – you have at least one individual within the State Department – you have two or three individuals within the Pentagon and you also have certain well-known lobbyists. So this was a case where the Justice Department didn't want their own illegal actions, in terms of conducting these wiretap operations, to be known – so they had their own reason of quashing this thing and basically wanting to cover it up via the State Secrets Privilege.
You had the State Department wanting to have it covered up, you had the Pentagon, and then also you had the Congress not having the reason, the motivation – which should be representing the American people and fulfilling their obligations to the American people – not wanting to touch the case because it's a controversial case.
Another troubling aspect of this new case is the fact that we don't know what they did with this information that they obtained illegally. Obviously they did not transfer it to the criminal division to be investigated – so what did they do with this information? Based on what we are getting from our sources, and these are people who have recently left the Bureau, it would not be illogical to actually consider the fact that the Bureau and the Justice Department may be using this information to actually blackmail people within Congress.
Horton: That makes perfect sense, and it reminds of that great article by David Rose in Vanity Fair about your case where he talked to different officials at the FBI and the Congressional Committees that you spoke to in secret session who implicated [former House Speaker] Dennis Hastert receiving suitcases full of cash, bribes, drug money and God-knows-what.
[snip]
Horton: Alright, James Bamford, when I look into this case, I keep finding the names Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, Marc Grossman, and, well, various people close to AIPAC, and what Col. Larry Wilkerson, Colin Powell's former aide, calls "the Cheney cabal" – but in a lot of cases, it seems this story is a lot bigger than just the Cheney cabal, we're talking about widespread corruption from both parties, all different agencies. Your comment?
Bamford: Well, that's exactly right, we're just seeing one tip of the iceberg yesterday with the conviction of Libby and that was one of the rare instances where somebody was actually brought to trial. What we don't see is all the stuff that went on behind the scenes where nobody has been arrested, and nobody has been brought to trial, and that's what the State Secrets Privilege was put in to hide – and a lot of that involved money being passed, and a lot of this has been going on for years, and was being used tremendously by the Republicans who have been very big on supplying money to Turkey and very big on supplying money to people that represent Turkey.
So that's the thing that really needs to be looked into – where is this money going, where is it coming from, who is getting it, how much involvement was there with the former Speaker of the House – how much did Denny Hastert have to do with this? Those are the issues that really could be brought out if they do have a congressional hearing. The court is pretty much out of the picture at this point since Sibel's case has gone all the way to the Supreme Court and it's been turned down. So the next avenue to pursue it is by having a congressional hearing, and now that the Democrats are in power, there's a possibility of having the entire case brought out during a congressional hearing which is something that couldn't have happened during the time when the Republicans were in control of Congress – so that is the next stage, and I hope that's what is going to happen after Sibel's petition has just come out.
[snip]
Horton: Alright, well in the last few minutes here Sibel, why don't you go ahead and explain your group, the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, and call for support, whatever you want.
Edmonds: Okay, well, this petition is going to be posted on all these organizations that have signed on, and you named a few of those organizations, and we have posted it on our website, NSWBC.org – that stands for National Security Whistleblowers Coalition – and in addition, in a few days, we are going to launch this public action campaign, and there will be a website where your listeners, and our supporters, the American public, can go and send this petition Congressman Waxman, Chairman Waxman's office, and urge him to set a date for this hearing and make sure that the hearing is a public hearing, and it's about the case, and to have these witnesses to stand there under oath and testify.
One other thing I would like to mention, and that's what you asked Jim about the fact that this went back to 1996, 97 – you need to realize that these people were not really out of the picture, because during those years, both say, Richard Perle and Douglas Feith, they were registered foreign agents for the government of Turkey and they were actively lobbying on behalf of Turkey. And when I say Turkey, I'm not talking about Turkey the country. Certain elements, the interest groups within Turkey, so you're looking at the same people.
Marc Grossman was the ambassador of Turkey, and then in 1997 he came and took a fairly high-level position in the State Department in 1997 – so Grossman didn't come to his office during this current administration, but he's been there – so you're looking at the same cabal. The fact that their tentacles were within the government agencies, even during those years, and of course, it became that much deeper, and stronger, during this administration is very important to remember.
And so much has been public – and this is why it's important to emphasize the fact that they just can't go willy-nilly and invoke the State Secrets Privilege and hope that the case will go just away. This needs to come out completely, and we need to see some accountability. And if Congress moves forward and holds this public hearing, I can guarantee you that you are going to be seeing some major criminal indictments here because we are not talking about light-level stuff – we are talking about very serious criminal activities.
Horton: That's right. And in fact anybody who wants to really delve into the background of Sibel Edmonds case, please go to Antiwar.com and check the archives for my interview last week of Luke Ryland who is the world's best investigator on this case as far as I can tell.
Edmonds: Yes, he is.
Horton: We're out of time here. Any final closing comments from either of you?
Bamford: I just want to supply my support to Sibel's effort here. I think she's been doing a fantastic job of trying to get this out there, and all the listeners out there, I hope they join in with their support.
Horton: I'd like to add too that the Constitution is far from perfect, but the House of Representatives is un-elected, or re-elected every two years – and that means each of those individual congressmen has to do what their constituents say. If their constituents demand that something happens, they will tend to go along. They will never see the light, but sometimes they can feel the heat – so it is not a pointless task to contact your congressman and pressure them to hold these hearings. This is important stuff.
---------------------------------
I'm with Scott, and Sibel, and Bamford. It's important that we get these hearings, and it's important the we hold Congress' feet to the fire.
Please phone and demand hearings. Congressmen Waxman - (202) 225-3976 - and Conyers - (202) 225-5126 (Capitol switchboard - 800-828-0498)
"To Gag and Call it a Privilege"
This one minute clip is from Sibel's acceptance speech for the PEN American Center’s 2006 PEN/Newman’s Own First Amendment Award. The footage was taken, with permission, from the new movie about Sibel and the nuclear black market, Kill The Messenger. (blog here)
And this 5 minute clip was put together by PEN about Sibel in honour of her winning their First Amendment award.
And this touching 10 minute audio (mp3) is from an informal breakfast gathering from the morning of the PEN Award night.
Sibel is tough as nails, angry as hell, and she's also positively human. She fights like hell, but she also needs to know that we've got her back. Right now, she's asking for your help. This is her last, best chance.
If we can't convince Henry Waxman to hold hearings this coming week, it looks like she literally won't have anywhere to turn.
Please call Waxman and Conyers and demand public hearings into Sibel's case. Let us know what sort of response you got, what worked & what didn't, here.
Waxman:
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
Conyers:
2426 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
And this 5 minute clip was put together by PEN about Sibel in honour of her winning their First Amendment award.
And this touching 10 minute audio (mp3) is from an informal breakfast gathering from the morning of the PEN Award night.
Sibel is tough as nails, angry as hell, and she's also positively human. She fights like hell, but she also needs to know that we've got her back. Right now, she's asking for your help. This is her last, best chance.
If we can't convince Henry Waxman to hold hearings this coming week, it looks like she literally won't have anywhere to turn.
Please call Waxman and Conyers and demand public hearings into Sibel's case. Let us know what sort of response you got, what worked & what didn't, here.
Waxman:
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
Conyers:
2426 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
Scott Horton interviewed Sibel and James Bamford
Scott Horton interviewed Sibel and James Bamford about the new campaign for new hearings, the State Secrets privilege and the big story from Monday: I'll try to get a transcript written up soon.
Transcript here
"Two FBI Whistleblowers Confirm Illegal Wiretapping of Government Officials and Misuse of FISA
State Secrets Privilege Was Used to Cover Up Corruption and Silence Whistleblowers"
Transcript here
Share your experience
Consider this an open thread where you can share your experience contacting the offices.
What worked? What didn't? What response did you get?
What worked? What didn't? What response did you get?
Transpartisan Coalition Calls for Whistleblower Hearings
30 liberal, libertarian and conservative groups are calling on Henry Waxman's House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to hold hearings on the case of gagged FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds.
The issues reported by Ms. Edmonds include:
----------------
Statement:
This blog Let Sibel Edmonds Speak will have new articles about the case, and a place where you can let us know that you called the offices, and what sort of response you got etc.
Please call Congressmen Conyers and Waxman and demand hearings.
Waxman:
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
Conyers:
2426 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
The issues reported by Ms. Edmonds include:
- Espionage activities within the FBI, DOD, and the Department of State.
- Cover-up of information and leads pre and post 9/11, under the excuse of protecting certain diplomatic relations.
- Deliberate mistranslation of crucial intelligence by FBI translators and management.
- Foreign entities bribing government officials and elected representatives.
----------------
Statement:
Transpartisan Coalition Calls for Whistleblower HearingsPlease call Congressmen Henry Waxman and John Conyers between now and next Wednesday and beg, implore and demand them to hold hearings into Sibel's case and the State Secrets Privilege.
Petition with strong left-right support headed to Capitol Hill
WASHINGTON, DC - The Liberty Coalition, a transpartisan public policy group dedicated to preserving the Bill of Rights, personal autonomy and individual privacy today sent a petition signed by 30 liberal, libertarian and conservative groups including the American Civil Liberties Union, Citizen Outreach, OMB Watch, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Government Accountability Project, Electronic Freedom Foundation, and the National Coalition Against the Censorship to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform urging prompt hearings on the case of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds.
Edmonds, a former FBI Language Specialist, brought charges of wrongdoing, criminal activity, cover-ups and national security threats inside the agency following the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Edmonds was promptly fired, which she asserts was an act of retaliation. The Department of Justice (DOJ) then used the State Secrets Privilege to shut down court proceedings in her case and prevent Congress from exploring the matter. Civil Liberties advocates argue that Edmonds’s case in an example of other instances where whistleblowers who tried to inform Congress and taxpayers about national security threats were intimidated silenced and retaliated against.
“Mrs. Edmonds is not a national security threat but a national hero and the American public deserves to hear the truth of her case. Congress must act and act now by having public hearings. Without them, the cover-ups and criminal activities will just continue.” Said Michael Ostrolenk, National Director of the Liberty Coalition.
Mr Ostrolenk was supported in his contentions by Liberty Coalition partner Stephen Kohn, President of the National Whistleblower Center who said “Congress must hear from Mrs. Edmonds and others who corroborated her case - we cannot wait until after another attack to learn about threats to our security."
This popular position is echoed by Danielle Brian, Executive Director of the Project On Government Oversight, a watchdog group that signed the appeal brief in Mrs. Edmonds case who said "The issues surrounding the Edmonds case are so significant that Congress must hold hearings to investigate the government's actions.”
The issues reported by Ms. Edmonds include:
· Espionage activities within the FBI, DOD, and the Department of State.
· Cover-up of information and leads pre and post 9/11, under the excuse of protecting certain diplomatic relations.
· Deliberate mistranslation of crucial intelligence by FBI translators and management.
· Foreign entities bribing government officials and elected representatives.
Civil Liberty advocates assert that these issues point to an abuse of power, a criminal conspiracy and attempts to cover -up wrong doing by using the coercive power of the state.
In regards to abuse of power, Ann Beeson, Associate Legal Director, ACLU National Office, and Lead Counsel in Mrs. Edmonds case said. “The government abused the state secrets privilege to deny Sibel Edmonds her day in court, and to prevent accountability in other cases for illegal spying and rendition. It is high time for Congress to intervene.”
Dr. William Weaver, Senior advisor and Board Member of the National Security Whistleblower’s Coalition, who is an expert on the state secret privilege agreed with Mrs. Beeson when he said, “In Edmonds' case tyranny comes in the form of the state secrets privilege, a foolproof mechanism of the federal government to hide executive branch corruption, incompetence, and illegal activity. This is a practice more at home with Czars and nabobs, and should have no place in the United States."
Ostrolenk continued by saying “This is worse than Watergate in that American lives have been lost and our national security has been compromised. Mrs. Edmonds case has been vindicated by the Justice Department office of Inspector General, and several congressional offices. The public has a right to know. The excuse of protecting national security is fallacious. They are protecting their own power and not the American people. Mrs. Edmonds must be heard.”
This blog Let Sibel Edmonds Speak will have new articles about the case, and a place where you can let us know that you called the offices, and what sort of response you got etc.
Please call Congressmen Conyers and Waxman and demand hearings.
Waxman:
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)
Conyers:
2426 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5126
(202) 225-0072 Fax
John.Conyers@mail.house.gov
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
