Kill the Messenger: Sibel Edmonds

Sibel Edmonds Case: More Destruction of Evidence re Nuclear Black Market

2008-06-06T23:04:00.000+10:00

It's remarkable, really.

The US government has taken some extreme measures to silence former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds. Among other reasons, they are obviously very nervous about information that Sibel has regarding the involvement of US, Israeli, and Turkish officials in supplying the nuclear black market.

Now we have this: The US Government apparently demanded that the Swiss government destroy all evidence - all 30,000 pages of it - related to the pending prosecution of the Tinner family. The Tinners were "very key suppliers" of AQ Khan's nuclear proliferation network, but their court case is now unlikely to proceed, given the destruction of the evidence.

Basic Facts
The Tinners, the father and two sons, were arrested by German authorities and extradited to Switzerland in 2004 for their role in supplying the A.Q. Khan nuclear proliferation network.

Two weeks ago, the Swiss President, responding to media reports, read out a prepared statement announcing that all the evidence relating to the Tinners' case was destroyed late last year. He said that it was important to destroy all the evidence, which included sensitive information about how to make nuclear weapons, in case the information fell into the hands of terrorists. He also stated that Switzerland was merely meeting its obligations under the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty and that the IAEA supervised the destruction of the documents.

That sounds reasonable.

The Questions
Unilateral Decision Making. The Swiss government is under pressure internally as a result of its unilateral decision to destroy the evidence. Both the parliament and the courts are accusing the Swiss government of violating the principle of Separation of Powers. The Parliament has already announced that it will hold an investigation into the matter.

Why the Secrecy? The announcement that the evidence was destroyed (6 months ago) was forced on the Swiss President by rumours in the media. The Swiss government refuses to answer any questions regarding the matter, as do the IAEA and the US government.

NPT Obligations? I haven't seen any media report which confirms or supports the Swiss claim that this destruction of evidence was an obligation under the NPT. However the Guardian, which has the best reporting on this story, quotes a 'former senior IAEA official' saying: "I am quite astonished. It's very unusual to see people destroying documents like this. They should be put somewhere very safe."

The destruction of evidence took place with the apparent imprimatur of the IAEA, but they refuse to comment too. Has the IAEA been corrupted too?

US Involvement
Virtually every media article about this matter - including those articles preceding the official announcement - notes the strong suspicion that the Swiss Government acted on behalf of the US Government, specifically the CIA. The Guardian has the details:

"While the Swiss government maintains the treasure trove of nuclear intelligence was destroyed for reasons of national security, the Americans may have been involved because Tinner is believed to have also been working for the CIA. Albright said Tinner was recruited by the American agency from 1999-2000.

"The Swiss were doing other people's dirty work," said an international official familiar with the investigation into the Khan network. "The allegation is that Urs (Tinner) was on the CIA payroll for a very large sum of money."
[...]
The Americans were also present (at the destruction), according to the international official. "The Americans were involved in the destruction. They were calling the shots," he said.
[...]
Had the evidence been presented in court, compromising and embarrassing information about the CIA's activities with the Khan network could have surfaced, say experts and officials. "

Time Magazine has a more benign take on the reasons that the CIA might have wanted the evidence destroyed:

"The official stonewalling has fueled speculation that the United States, and specifically the CIA, has pressured the Swiss government to destroy the documents to aid its own efforts to stop nuclear smuggling, whatever the effect on the Tinners' trials. (emphasis mine)"

One item that I have not seen mentioned in any of the recent press reports is that the US government actively hindered the Swiss investigation into the Tinners for at least 18 months. In May 2006, former weapons inspector David Albright testified in Congress that the US government had been stonewalling the Swiss investigation:

"The U.S. Government Needs to Cooperate With Swiss Prosecutions of the Tinners.

Although the focus today is on Pakistan and unanswered questions about the Khan network, the United States has been remiss in assisting the overseas prosecution of key members of the Khan network. The United States has ignored multiple requests from Swiss prosecutors for cooperation that have extended over a year.
[...]
The (Swiss) Office of the Attorney General is disappointed over this matter. It is difficult to understand the actions of the U.S. Government. Its lack of assistance needlessly complicates this important investigation.
[...]
The United States should respond to the Swiss requests for assistance as quickly as possible. To continue to ignore these requests undermines the vital prosecution of key members of the Khan network and risks undercutting support for Swiss cooperation in non-proliferation matters. In addition, I find this lack of cooperation frankly embarrassing to the United States and those of us who believe that the United States should take the lead in bringing members of the Khan network to justice for arming our enemies with nuclear weapons."

In an interview on Democracy Now a week later, Albright said that he finds the US stonewalling "disturbing and perplexing," "mystifying" and "embarrassing as an American," adding:

"The signal (the U.S. government is) sending is that it doesn’t want the Swiss to prosecute these three people, and yet they provide no reason for that."

Albright's perspective certainly add some important context to the allegations that the US government pressured the Swiss to destroy the Tinner files in order to prevent a public trial - and all that might entail...

Secrecy
The Tinner case brings to mind the Sibel Edmonds case, in terms of the underlying issues, the secrecy, and the destruction of evidence.

One of the key issues in Sibel's case is the involvement of American, Turkish and Israeli officials in supplying the nuclear black market, including the so-called AQ Khan network. See the UK's Times' "For sale: West’s deadly nuclear secrets:

Edmonds described how foreign intelligence agents had enlisted the support of US officials to acquire a network of moles in sensitive military and nuclear institutions.
[...]
Her story shows just how much the West was infiltrated by foreign states seeking nuclear secrets. It illustrates how western government officials turned a blind eye to, or were even helping, countries such as Pakistan acquire bomb technology.

In order to keep this information from becoming public, Sibel's case has been swept under the blanket of secrecy by the invocation of the State Secrets Privilege.

Destruction of Evidence
In a subsequent article, The Times also reported that the FBI "has been accused of covering up a file detailing government dealings with a network stealing nuclear secrets." The case file, 203A-WF-210023, was known to exist, but the FBI now denies that it exists. The question at the time was whether the FBI was lying about the existence of the file, or whether the case file, which contained all the evidence of a multi-year counterintelligence investigation, had been destroyed. I had been leaning toward the option that the FBI was hiding the existence of the file, but given that the US government has apparently been able to orchestrate the destruction of evidence in the Swiss Tinner case, it's easier to imagine that they could, and would, destroy their own case file.

Tenuous Justifications
The main argument for the destruction of the Tinner evidence is that it had to be destroyed in case the nuclear blueprints somehow got into the hands of terrorists or rogue states. This is obviously a worthy objective, however:
a) Copies of the exact same information are known to exist elsewhere, and is suspected to be on the Khan network computers in Dubai.
b) There is no indication in any of the media reports that any effort was made to destroy only the sensitive information while maintaining the evidence required to prosecute the Tinners.
c) The US (and UK) allowed the network to proliferate nuclear hardware and nuclear know-how for years without apparently being concerned about the fallout. Why the concern all of a sudden with the Tinner case?

The Times accurately described how the US has ignored proliferation for years, without any apparent concern:

"The wider nuclear network has been monitored for many years by a joint Anglo-American intelligence effort. But rather than shut it down, investigations by law enforcement bodies such as the FBI and Britain’s Revenue & Customs have been aborted to preserve diplomatic relations."

In Sibel's case, the FBI watched while the network delivered nuclear product not only to their acknowledged end-customers, but also while freelancers within the network made copies of the information stolen "from every nuclear agency in the United States" and sold it to the highest bidder. There's no indication that the US government did anything to stop the flow of any of this information at the time, but rather went to extraordinary lengths to ensure that Sibel's knowledge of these events did not become public. Similarly, people at the Pentagon and State Department were able to ensure that the honest counterintelligence agents at the FBI were prevented from moving forward on any of their multi-year investigations that had discovered all of these nefarious activities.

After all this, we are now being asked to believe that the destruction of evidence in the Tinner case is to prevent secure information from getting in the hands of terrorists? Please.

Where is the Media?
One other similarity between Sibel's case and the Tinner case is the absence of the US mainstream media. The Tinner case broke on May 23. The Guardian article was on May 31. The US media has been completely AWOL on this story, apart from a single AP story that ran in some venues on May 23. UPI ran a short article based on the Guardian story, and Time ran an article on June 3. The New York Times hasn't run a single article on the story.

The silence (1,2) is baffling.

Summary
The US government has done just about everything it can to ensure that Sibel Edmonds is prohibited from spilling the beans on what she knows about the nuclear black market, among other things. Now we see the hand of the US government apparently reaching into a foreign democracy, exporting the concept of the 'unitary executive' and upsetting the balance of powers, to destroy evidence which was to be used to prosecute crimes involving the spread of nuclear weapons to rogue regimes.

The US government had previously demonstrated that it didn't wanted to prosecute these crimes, therefore their flimsy ex-poste rationales for destroying the evidence, in secret, need to be held up for extra scrutiny.

What's going on???

------------------------

Crossposted at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak

For more background on Sibel's case and the nuclear black market, see my "Sibel Edmonds Case: Nukes for sale (Pt 2)" and "Sibel Edmonds Case: Benazir and The 'Islamic' Bomb"

Sibel Edmonds Case: ABC News investigates Hastert scandals and the Turkish Connections.

2008-06-04T21:30:00.002+10:00

Kudos to ABC News for (belatedly) taking the opportunity of Dennis Hastert's new lobbying job to give a run-down of some of the scandals Hastert has been involved in.

Despite the benign headline ("Ex-House Speaker Hastert Finds New Home"), Justin Rood mentions the Mark Foley / House Page scandal, Hastert's (under-reported) involvement in the Abramoff affair, and Hastert's dodgy land / earmarking deals. Rood's piece ends thusly:

"A 2005 Vanity Fair article alleged Turkish groups and individuals at the Turkish Consulate in Washington, D.C. had discussed funneling tens of thousands of dollars to Hastert in exchange for political favors; his spokesman at the time denied Hastert had any knowledge of Turkish groups and had done no favors.

Hastert's new firm has done work for the government of Turkey and Turkish companies, a spokesperson confirmed Monday. She could not say whether or not Hastert would be working on projects involving that country."

As far as I know, this is the first time that the Vanity Fair investigation has ever been referenced in the corporate media... 34 months after publication.

Please head over to the ABC article and leave a message of support & encouragement. We need to reward this sort of reporting, and also build on the momentum. The popularity of my article about Hastert on Monday demonstrates that there is a groundswell of interest in these matters.

Fox News, of all places, has also been reporting on (some of) Hastert's crimes:

"Budget earmarks became a national scandal — and a national joke — after some wasteful schemes made headlines recently:
[...]
The most recognizable name is Illinois Republican Dennis Hastert...

In February 2004, Hastert, with partners and through a trust that did not bear his name, bought up 69 acres of land that adjoined his farm some 60 miles outside Chicago. The price was $340,000. In May 2005, Hastert transferred an additional 69 acres from his farm into the trust.

Two months later, Congress passed a spending bill into which Hastert inserted a $207 million earmark to fund the “Prairie Parkway” which, when completed, would run just a few miles from the 138 acres owned by Hastert’s trust.

After President Bush flew to Hastert’s district in August 2005 to sign the bill, Hastert and his partners flipped the land for what appeared to be a multi-million dollar profit.

One of the problems with political reporting today is that these issues tend to only (if ever) get reported in 'silos.' We need to take the opportunity of Hastert's new job to present the portfolio of his crimes and dodgy deals in their entirety, and decide whether we really want to allow these people to seamlessly cross-over into private practice to continue to make millions of dollars, selling out the national interest.

One thing that I didn't mention in my article on Monday is that Sibel has repeatedly stated that there was actually a concerted effort to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate the fact that these Turkish interests were buying up congressmen, including Hastert.

Here's Sibel:

“…What happened was, FBI had this information since 1997. In 1999, the Clinton Administration actually asked the Department of Justice to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate Hastert, and certain other elected officials that were not named in this (VF) article, to be investigated formally. And the Department of Justice actually went about appointing this prosecutor, but after the Administration changed they quashed that investigation and they closed it despite the fact they had all sorts of evidence, again I’m talking about wiretaps, documents- paper documents- that was highly explosive and could have been easily used to indict the Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert. That investigation was closed in 2001, and this was around the time I started reporting my cases to the Congress.”

Vanity Fair reported the same thing, from a different source

"One counter-intelligence official familiar with Edmonds’s case has told Vanity Fair that the F.B.I. opened an investigation into covert activities by Turkish nationals in the late 1990’s. That inquiry found evidence, mainly via wiretaps, of attempts to corrupt senior American politicians in at least two major cities—Washington and Chicago.
[...]
[I]n December 2001, Joel Robertz, an F.B.I. special agent in Chicago, contacted Sibel and asked her to review some wiretaps. Some were several years old, others more recent; all had been generated by a counter-intelligence that had its start in 1997. “It began in D.C.,” says an F.B.I. counter-intelligence official who is familiar with the case file. “It became apparent that Chicago was actually the center of what was going on.”

Its subject was explosive; what sounded like attempts to bribe elected members of Congress, both Democrat and Republican. “There was pressure within the bureau for a special prosecutor to be appointed and take the case on, “the official says. Instead, his colleagues were told to alter the thrust of their investigation – away from elected politicians and toward appointed officials. “This is the reason why Ashcroft reacted to Sibel in such an extreme fashion,” he says “It was to keep this from coming out.”

In her secure testimony, Edmonds disclosed some of what she recalled hearing. In all, says a source who was present, she managed to listen to more than 40 of the Chicago recordings supplied by Robertz. Many involved an F.B.I. target at the city’s large Turkish Consulate, as well as members of the American-Turkish Consulate, as well as members of the American-Turkish Council and the Assembly of Turkish American Associates.

Some of the calls reportedly contained what sounded like references to large scale drug shipments and other crimes.... One name, however, apparently stood out – a man the Turkish callers often referred to by the nickname “Denny boy.” It was the Republican congressman from Illinois and Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert."

An enterprising reporter ought to be able to track some of this down... Counter-intelligence officials have confirmed that steps were taken to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate the fact that Hastert and others were taking bribes from officials at the Turkish Consulate, and key Turkish lobbying groups (American Turkish Council and Assembly of Turkish American Associates) related to "large scale drug shipments and other crimes."

We know that the FBI has been trying to determine the source of the money, and trying to determine how it is distributed:

Some of it may come from criminal activity, possibly drug trafficking, but much more might come from arms dealing. Contracts in the hundreds of millions, or even billions of dollars provide considerable fat for those well placed to benefit.

We know that some of the other people named by Sibel have since been added to the Turkish payroll, with multi-million dollar salaries.

We know that Sibel has outlined a 'recipe' whereby "ex-congressmen turned lobbyists ... (pocket) a few dozen who still serve."

This is not about Hastert himself, so much as perpetuating a system where people like Hastert - and Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Eric Edelman, Marc Grossman, Roy Blunt, Dan Burton, Tom Lantos, Bob Livingston, Stephen Solarz and others - continue to subvert American democracy for private profit.

What will it take to stop it?

(For starters, please leave a supportive comment over at Justin Rood's article at ABC News)

Crossposted at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak

Sibel Edmonds Case: Dennis Hastert to receive payoffs for 'services rendered'

2008-06-02T15:52:00.002+10:00

So, former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds is again proved right. For more than a year Sibel has been predicting that Dennis Hastert will join a lobbying firm involved with Turkey, and now we learn that Hastert is joining Dickstein Shapiro.

In the "Representative Engagements" section of Dickstein's website, we learn that they represented "the government of Turkey in connection with the development and financing by private sponsors of the Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline and TransCaspian gas pipeline spanning from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean."

Dennis Hastert, who is listed in Sibel's "Rogues Gallery," was caught on FBI wiretaps accepting bribes from Turkish criminal elements associated with the Turkish government, as documented in Vanity Fair in 2005 and elsewhere.

The following clip from Kill The Messenger, a documentary about Sibel's case, discusses some of Hastert's involvement as mentioned in Vanity Fair.

In researching the Vanity Fair article, journalist David Rose interviewed various congressional staffers and counter-intelligence officials who are familiar with the case. He reported that there were three separate types of bribes paid to Hastert:
1) "(T)ens of thousands of dollars to be paid to Hastert’s campaign funds in small checks."
2) "(T)ens of thousands of dollars in surreptitious payments in exchange for political favors and information."
3) "(A)t least $500,000"

Hastert was lucky that there was literally zero follow-up in the mainstream media to these most serious charges. Hastert did not sue Vanity Fair for libel, instead, Hastert got his spokesman to send Vanity Fair a bizarre Letter to the Editor in response, 6 months later. BradBlog has the letter here, along with Sibel's effective debunking of Hastert's response.

The only action taken in response to the startling revelations in Vanity Fair was by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) which filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) asking them to investigate the "(T)ens of thousands of dollars to be paid to Hastert’s campaign funds in small checks." According to the Vanity Fair article, these bribes were funneled into Hastert's campaign in amounts less than $200, which would mean that the contributions were below the threshold for reporting. The Federal Election Commission dropped the investigation in early 2006 without answering the specific charge.

The bribes identified in Vanity Fair are probably just the tip of the iceberg, merely down-payments on what was promised to him when he left office, and could 'earn' a multi-million dollar salary as a lobbyist.

Sibel described how the process works, using another member of her "Rogues Gallery,"
former State Dept official Marc Grossman as an example:

"For example, look at Mr. Marc Grossman. He used to be the U.S. ambassador in Turkey and used his position within the State Department to secure future higher-level positions while in office—and I would like to emphasize this—while in office and with several agencies knowing about it. Some people in these agencies wanted to investigate these cases but they were prevented from going forward.

..And just take a look at where Mr. Grossman is today. Within a few months after he gave his resignation, he obtained a position with a semi-legitimate Turkish company that is supplying him with a very attractive monetary reward, (and) he obtained (another) position with a lobbying firm that represents (Turkey)."

And Sibel has made the same case elsewhere:

"Please do not make the grave and naive mistake of assuming that Grossman found and obtained his highly lucrative and questionable positions after his resignation in January 2005."

It appears that these arrangements aren't the typical 'Revolving Door' retirement packages, but rather specific quid pro quo deals. People like Hastert and Grossman and the others quite literally sell out their government while in office on the specific promise that they will be rewarded when they leave.

Hastert won't actually be a 'Lobbyist' according to Dickstein Shapiro, he'll be "providing strategy advice to the firm and its clients" - spending half his time in Chicago and half his time in DC.

Most likely, some of that 'strategy advice' will include advice on how to corrupt some of the sitting congressmen: The people who bribed Hastert and the others need to ensure the continuity of their operations, regardless of who is sitting in Congress. Sibel says that the foreign entities who are successful in this business simply need to follow a basic recipe:

"Get yourself a few ‘Dime a Dozen Generals,’ bid high in the ‘former statesmen lobby auction’, and put in your pocket one or two ‘ex-congressmen turned lobbyists’ who know the ropes when it comes to pocketing a few dozen who still serve."

Dickstein Shapiro, Hastert's new employers, were deeply involved with Turkey and the Central Asian region during the time that Hastert was caught taking these bribes - 1996 to 2001. For example, It was Dickstein Shapiro, in conjunction with the Baker Botts law firm, who put together the 'contract of the century' - the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (or BTC) pipeline which was to carry oil from Azerbaijan to the West, via Georgia and Turkey.

Some of Dickstein Shapiro's other claims to fame include:
1) Defending "former Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams in connection with the Iran-Contra investigations."
2) "(S)uccessfully defended and represented prominent clients in a number of other high-profile cases such as...BCCI Bank"
3) Employing convicted felon Lewis Scooter Libby (and his wife), who was a partner at the firm from 1986 to 1989.

If there's any justice in the world, Dickstein Shapiro will soon be adding Dennis Hastert to their 'Ex-employees who are now convicted felons' Hall of Fame.

Crossposted at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak

Sibel Edmonds' Kill The Messenger at DOXA festival

2008-05-30T17:17:00.000+10:00

Kill The Messenger, the documentary about FBI translator & whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, will be screened at the DOXA film festival in Vancouver on Saturday evening.

The Vancouver Sun lists Kill The Messenger as one of their 'Best Bets' for the festival.

----

As some of you know, I've been traveling for the last few months and haven't posted anything on Sibel's case for a while - unfortunately not much has happened in the interim.

There are still tickets available for the screening of Kill The Messenger at the DOXA festival in Vancouver on Saturday night. You can get your tickets here.

You may have already seen some of my YouTubes about the film. The trailer is here. In this new 5 minute clip from Kill The Messenger, Sibel's ACLU lawyers discuss the case.

From the clip:

Ann Beeson: It’s really phenomenal to me that any court can look at her case and say: "No, it can’t go forward, proceed or win her claim."

Ben Wizner: What you have here is the Attorney General of the U.S saying: "The plaintiff can’t even set foot inside a court because the entire case is a state secret."

Ann Beeson: The defendant is the Justice Department, it’s the FBI that committed the wrongdoing. And it’s the Justice Department’s own internal oversight body that has concluded that our client should win.

Ben Wizner: The danger is that if the government succeeds in that really overbroad invocation of the ‘State Secret Privilege’ in this case, it will be a very easy tactic for the government in future cases to avoid accountability and to avoid responsbility.

Ann Beeson: A brick wall and another brick wall and another brick wall!
And at every turn, it’s was the federal government who is preventing her from having,… from getting any justice!

Ben Wizner: And that cannot be!

Ann Beeson: Not in our democracy.

Ben Wizner: No, it can’t be!

Also from the clip:

Sibel Edmonds: Look! When the Attorney General came initially and invoked the State Secret Privilege, ok ? He cited two reasons: "to protect certain 'sensitive’ diplomatic relations," and "to protect certain foreign business relations of the United States."

Now, they‘re saying: That whole information, eveything is classified.

We don’t know what diplomatic relations they are referring to. They must be ashamed of it! They don’t want to mention it. So we have certain diplomatic relations that prevent criminals being prosecuted here.

And I am talking about criminals in the United States of America. American citizens! I am not referring to only foreigners here!

Some of those people have been named here

DOXA's blurb for the film is:

In the wake of September 11, 2001, Sibel Edmonds is approached by the FBI. As an American of Iranian and Turkish origin, Edmonds’ linguistic skill set makes her a valuable asset to the Language Services Unit, where she spends months translating high-security clearance documents. One day shortly after reporting the possible infiltration of her unit by Turkish spies to her supervisors and their supervisors, Edmonds’ world is turned upside-down.

Instead of seeing her colleague become the target of an investigation, she is interrogated, then unceremoniously fired and warned not to pursue her claims any further as she would be watched and listened to. In the years that follow, Edmonds is transformed into the country’s first public National Security whistle-blower and a prominent First Amendment advocate (the ACLU calls her the “most gagged woman in America”). Sibel is fighting for the very ideals that American democracy relies on and is facing, against overwhelming odds, some of the most reckless and powerful officials in the U.S. government. She brings her case to Congress, the 9/11 Commission, the media and the Supreme Court, facing down not only the FBI, but also then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, Vice-President Dick Cheney and then-National Security Advisor Condelezza Rice.

Sibel has granted the film crew full and exclusive access to document her story and her struggle as we zero in on her “secret”—the network of nuclear black-market, narcotics and illegal arms trafficking activities. Playing like a big-screen adaptation of Frontline, Kill the Messenger is a riveting true spy story that presents one citizen’s unexpected journey through the politicized quagmire that is America’s War on Terror.

The Vancouver Sun, in their 'Best Bets' of the festival says:

"This French film documents the cold, crass efforts by officials in the U.S. to bring down Sibel Edmonds, an American of Iranian and Turkish origin who was hired by the FBI as a translator after Sept. 11, 2001. Reporting the possible infiltration of Turkish spies turns her life upside down: she is interrogated, fired, and subjected to a relentless campaign of intimidation. Edmonds doesn't back down as she takes her fight to Congress, the 9/11 Commission, the media, and the Supreme Court. Saturday, May 31 at 9 p.m. at Pacific Cinémathèque."

Hopefully the screening of the movie will trigger some media attention to this case. When the documentary was first shown in France, all the major papers wrote about it. Here is a selection (apologies for some clunky translation):

Le Monde.

The history of Sibel Edmonds could be used to make a John Grisham 'whodunnit.' A few days after the attacks of September 11, the young woman of Turkish extraction is recruited by the FBI. She is in charge of the translation of the phone-tappings, the interrogations and the documents within the framework of the antiterrorist fight. Sibel Edmonds speaks Persian, Farsi and Azeri.

In December of the same year, she is contacted by a colleague from the FBI who tries to recruit her for the account of a mysterious Turkish lobbying organization. By denouncing this manifest case of espionage and by revealing that the FBI hides information over September 11, Sibel Edmonds found herself at the heart of the incredible business of State.

After the Children of Tranquility Bay, a beautiful documentary on the American camps of behavior modification, the film-makers Mathieu Verboud and Jean-Robert Viallet have made a film full with suspense and revelations about these men and these women - the "whistleblower" ("those who blow a whistle") - which denounce the dysfunctions of an organization or an administration. An attractive diving (?), sometimes a little difficult, in the mysteries of the reason of State in America.

AP (France)

The much-awaited documentary "Kill The Messenger" is showing Tuesday on Canal+. Mathieu (Verboud) and Jean-Robert Viallet met Sibel Edmonds whose life was transformed into nightmare after her ousting from the FBI. In a 84 minute film, they deliver the impressive testimony of Sibel Edmonds.

The young woman is 32 years old when she is recruited by the FBI as a translator, four days after September 11, 2001. She is charged with translating wiretapped conversations, some related to the 9/11 attacks. Sibel Edmonds was born in Teheran from Turkish parents, and spent the first 18 years of her life in Teheran and in Turkey, before landing in the U.S and marrying an American.

But her world gets turned upside-down when she discovers that a colleague is involved with illegal activities implicating Turkish officials. The filmmakers report the rest of Sibel's story. She reports the incident to her superiors and gets fired from the FBI. After her firing, she goes to the U.S Congress. Months pass and Sibel Edmonds realizes that nobody makes the slightest move. The young woman tells her story to the media. Time has come for Attorney General John Ashcroft to classify the whole Sibel Edmonds case as a"State Secret." If the young translator continues to speak, she'll go to prison. Determined, yet powerless, Sibel Edmonds suffers two years of loneliness.

In 2003, the Bush government accepts the creation of a commission whose role is to investigate the government and intelligence failures that led to 9/11. Sibel Edmonds then will carry out a long battle in order to expose her case: Turkish spies infiltrated the FBI and the government is apparently aware of these spies. July 24, 2004, the 9/11 Commission Report comes out, but Sibel's testimony is not included. The young woman is regarded as a "whistle-blower", she is joined in her fight by intelligence agents from the FBI, the CIA and NSA. The two filmmakers find leads pointing to the role of Turkey, Israel and Pakistan. In the 80's, at the time of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S and Turkey were instrumental in helping Pakistan acquire nuclear power. Turkey appears to have acted as a back-door conduit for some of those operations. Later on, Israel came into play, too. At the time, the CIA knew everything but turned a blind eye, even when Pakistan started selling its technology to friendly countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya. By then, nuclear proliferation had gone out of control and the U.S let it go. In the 90's, when the Talibans were in power in Afghanistan, some nuclear equipment even landed in the hands of Usama Bin Laden.

In addition, American-Turkish Council (ATC), a powerful American lobby, has for many years facilitated trade of the weapons with the assistance of Israel. And it is in an indirect way that Sibel Edmonds denounces the secrets of these diplomats and secret agents with her superiors. In spite of this, the young translator finds herself entangled in a spy case whose ramifications are beyond the knowledge of the young woman and the TV viewer at the same time. Besides being thorough, the investigation is captivating and alarming. Sibel's case is so complex that it look like a labyrinth without exit.

Le Figaro.

“A Woman to Cut Down” - the true story of a woman recruited by the FBI after September 11 then sanctioned for her uprightness.

Perhaps the Public imagined that with the Children of Tranquility Bay (film on a center for young difficult Americans, rewarded in Fipa), programmed last May on France 2, Mathieu Verboud and Jean-Robert Vialley had reached a peak in the originality of the writing. But the public didn't count on this new investigation worthy of the best whodunnit by John Grisham…

The difference is that this is a true story. That of Sibel Edmonds, called “the most explosive woman of September 11”, an involuntary detonator of a politico-legal explosive business.

“It is while working on the phenomenon of “Whistle Blowers”, these employees who denounce the illegal intrigues their incredible owners and stories (Enron, pharmaceutical laboratories…), that we could come into contact with it”, tells Mathieu Verboud.

Shortly after September 11, this American born in Iran and having grown up in Turkey, who speaks Persan, Azeri and Turkish, is recruited by the FBI to translate kilometers of phone-tappings. Corruption, drugs, money laundering, companies screens, nuclear black market… what she will discover is amazing. But when spies infiltrated within the department of translation try to recruit her, she decides to inform her bosses. It is there that her life gets rocked…

Attempt at intimidation, reprisals, Sibel Edmonds is finally laid off… She turns to the Congress, then towards the Dept of Justice, but the Bush Administration chooses to muzzle this too-awkward witness, “to kill the messenger” like one says to the FBI, by exhuming an old law: the “secret States' privilege”. In short: Silence or the prison. Why? To hide what?

The Pitiless Microcosm of Washington

The business could have stopped there. But this is just the beginning for the small translator, flag-carrier for “whistle blowers”, a long struggle which the film-makers capture. A crusade for the right to the truth. And for the public, a diving haletante (?) in the twists and turns of the espionage. “When a woman leaves in war, she is never innocent" continues Mathieu Verboud. If a whistle blower can cause an earthquake, imagine when it is about September 11. It was thought that she knew an enormous secret. But the objective was also to show how the world of information had managed the terrorist attacks, the political pressures and the incompetence of the bureaucracy. ”

A work of really good investigation which required ninety days of filming and which took on board the film-makers during six months in the life of this “woman to be cut down”: "She authorized us to follow it all the more easily - as the press did not support her. She uses her public image like a strategy. But she gave us total freedom - so long as we did not ask about her specific secret.”

Their film thus points the failures of the internal investigations of the FBI, the hazardous methods, the flip-flopping, lies of the heartless microcosm of Washington, fully supported with testimonies, official speeches and recorded footage. Thus they follow senior officials, federal employees, intelligence agents (FBI, the CIA, NSA) who did not hesitate to come forward: “They needed to speak. In the information also, there are honest people. I wanted to show that the political power was certainly instrumental, but never the State had handled them as much”, insists Verboud.

The camera tracking faces, expressions, faintnesses. The result is the height of the ambition. Their accounts, pure and hard, are so rich in revelations and leaves the audience, incredulous, flabbergasted or disgusted, and will have the feeling of watching a psychological thriller which mixes suspense and reflexion. Just some lengths will be reproached. It certainly is a complex business.

This documentary which could have been only one investigation into how the Bush Administration defies national security, goes well beyond.

Putting in prospect the strange bonds between the American politicians, Turkey, Israel, Pakistan, diplomats, secret service, multinational weapons procurement, nuclear programs - léaire (?), this film casts an unexpected light on the global environment and the crisis in the Middle East."

Armenews

"Film on Canal+ Don't miss - based on Vanity Fair's investigation - Sibel EDMONDS/FBI, Turk-English translator who translated the communications between the Speaker of the House and Turkish officials to receive bribes in order not to allow the resolution of the genocide to Congress in 2000

The life of Sibel Edmonds took a nightmarish turn when she was fired for mysterious reasons. Young translator having joined the FBI after September 11, she was sanctioned for her uprightness. Indeed, it discovered that one of her colleagues covered illegal activities of Turkish and American officials . She immediately informed her superiors of them. Their answer was to fire her. But the young woman decided to inform the media. Having allowed the cameras of Mathieu Verboud and Jean-Robert Viallet to follow her in her search for truth, she defies the FBI today.

The muzzled truth

A WOMAN TO BE CUT DOWN is a true espionage thriller on the only American citizen who dared to defy the F.B.I so that the truth bursts, and to ensure the Americans the safety that their government owes them.

“This real-life Whodunnit” is especially the history of Sibel Edmonds and her combat: how a translator, link of the complex chains of American information, discovers wiretaps blaming officials from America her allies. How it will defy those which threaten it, to overcome its fears and to defend the freedom which justifies its work for the country. And how, in the name of this same principle, the American authorities will prevent Sibel from speaking.

There is a true phenomenon around the translator, who has broad public support. Last April, Sibel Edmonds received from Paul Newman the “2006 First Amendment Award”, eminent distinction decreed by the PEN Club, an association in support of writers and the freedom of expression.

Revealed secrets

The work of the film-makers, at Sibel's side, explores the stakes of secrecy, was since the first day blocked by the State which justifies the threats against the young woman. Since September 11, 2001, the safety of the United States however allows innumerable distortions to the sacro-sanct personal freedoms. But higher interests seem to dictate the policy of the Bush administration…

Agents of the American Intelligence Community nevertheless “remain patriots” who validated the investigations of Mathieu Verboud. Those carry out in Turkey, Israel and to Pakistan, in the slides of the ministries for Justice and the Foreign Affairs, the F.B.I and the Pentagon. They join other significant businesses and mix business with weapons, technological espionage, nuclear black market, heroin traffic, money laundering, corruption - in particular with the American Congress - and serious threats, directly relating to national security.

A captivating and alarming investigation."

L'Humanite

"“To always deny, always hide”. This is the currency of the American secret service. Sibel Edmonds learned to her costs.

Recall the facts. Only two months after having been employed by the FBI translation department, this woman of Turco-Iranian origin will be approached by Turkish spies within the service. After having referred about it to her superiors, she is laid off without explanation, and decides to attack in justice the FBI.

In vain, her lawsuit is rejected without reason and the Minister for Justice issues the secrecy of State on the business, thus prohibiting her from speaking about her discoveries. This documentary with the simple but effective realization plunges us in the slides of the administration Bush and it is far from being reassuring!"

L'Express

"Who? Shortly after September 11, Sibel Edmonds, American of Turkish origin, is approached by the FBI to become translator in one of the most secret units. Patriotically, she accepts the job.

What? Quickly, the film demonstrates the presence of spies in the pocket of Turkish lobbies. It tells of the hierarchy, which dismisses her whole case. Sibel tries to warn the Congress, then justice, of her discoveries. But Justice Minister John Ashcroft stamps her entire case with "States Secrets"

Why? Mathieu Verboud and Jean-Robert Viallet reveal, in a palpitating investigation, the combat of this young woman against the FBI initially, then against the American authorities, whose lies hide behind the sacro-holy safety of the State"

Libération

Sibel Edmonds is 32 years old when she is contacted for the first time by the FBI, a few days after September 11, 2001. Like numerous other translators, this American, usually speaking Turkish and the Persian language, is committed to make up for lost time of the American information to decipher thousands of hours of phone-tappings.

A few weeks later, Sibel translates sulfurous conversations about money laundering, trafficking of weapons and drug, and corruption implicating American, Turkish and Israeli political personalities... Two months later, Sibel is approached by one of her translator colleagues and her husband. They propose to her, without ambiguity, a financial arrangement if she does not transmit all information which she translates. Informing her bosses at once, Sibel Edmonds enters an infernal process which lasts nearly five years. Because all her direct higher interlocutors and direction of the FBI order her to keep silent. And when she alerts the Department of Justice, she is immediately fired from the FBI and is formally prohibited from speaking. This extremely rare procedure, Secret State Privilege, obliges her to keep her silence, even in front of a judge, in the name of the secrecy of State.

The documentary clearly aims at presenting Sibel Edmonds like an angry, passionate American. The title says it all, since her combat becomes extensive since she created a coalition of "whistle blowers", a term indicating those which denounce the dysfunctions of the State, she gathers a hundred former members of the FBI, NSA, the CIA and Justice...

It is difficult to really understand why Sibel is silenced: the deep lack of curiousity of the American agencies about counter-espionage or a corruption installed at the most top of the State? One can only choose.

After the first US screening of Kill The Messenger in DC in February 07, a panel of journalists and lawyers discussed the film - James Bamford, Bob Parry, Kristina Borjesson, Ben Wizner and others. You can see a ten minute video of that here. Sibel also gave a short speech at the event, as did the two French co-directors, that video is here. I liked co-director Jean-Robert Viallet's observation:

Why are French people doing this film? Because nobody in America did it.

Kill The Messenger has been shown a few times in the US, but I'm not aware of any reviews appearing in the mainstream press. Hopefully our Canadian friends will take the lead of their French, rather than US, counterparts.

KTM to be shown in Vancouver

2008-05-16T16:51:00.003+10:00

Kill The Messenger will be shown at the DOXA Festival in Vancouver.

Screening details: Saturday May 31 | 9:00 pm | Pacific Cinémathèque

From DOXA's website:

In the wake of September 11, 2001, Sibel Edmonds is approached by the FBI. As an American of Iranian and Turkish origin, Edmonds’ linguistic skill set makes her a valuable asset to the Language Services Unit, where she spends months translating high-security clearance documents. One day shortly after reporting the possible infiltration of her unit by Turkish spies to her supervisors and their supervisors, Edmonds’ world is turned upside-down.

Instead of seeing her colleague become the target of an investigation, she is interrogated, then unceremoniously fired and warned not to pursue her claims any further as she would be watched and listened to. In the years that follow, Edmonds is transformed into the country’s first public National Security whistle-blower and a prominent First Amendment advocate (the ACLU calls her the “most gagged woman in America”). Sibel is fighting for the very ideals that American democracy relies on and is facing, against overwhelming odds, some of the most reckless and powerful officials in the U.S. government. She brings her case to Congress, the 9/11 Commission, the media and the Supreme Court, facing down not only the FBI, but also then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, Vice-President Dick Cheney and then-National Security Advisor Condelezza Rice.

Sibel has granted the film crew full and exclusive access to document her story and her struggle as we zero in on her “secret”—the network of nuclear black-market, narcotics and illegal arms trafficking activities. Playing like a big-screen adaptation of Frontline, Kill the Messenger is a riveting true spy story that presents one citizen’s unexpected journey through the politicized quagmire that is America’s War on Terror.

KTM To Be Screened at Tiburon International Film Festival

2008-03-05T07:58:00.002+11:00

http://www.tiburonfilmfestival.com/filmInfo.php?film_id=5276

Wednesday, March 19, 2008 @ 06:00 PM
Tiburon, California

This will be the West Coast premiere of Kill The Messenger.

Sibel Edmonds: 'Buckle up, there's much more coming.'

2008-02-03T16:12:00.000+11:00

In the last few weeks, UK's Times has run a series of articles about the so-called 'Sibel Edmonds case.' ('For sale: West’s deadly nuclear secrets, 'FBI denies file exposing nuclear secrets theft' and 'Tip-off thwarted nuclear spy ring probe')

Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds stumbled into a world of espionage, nuclear black market, narcotics trafficking, money laundering, and corruption at the highest levels of the US government.

I interviewed Sibel yesterday regarding the current investigation and reporting by the Times, the failures of the US media, and last week's decision by the Bush administration to legalize the sale of nuclear technology to Turkey, in an apparent effort to exonerate prior criminal activity by officials in his administration.

Sibel also has some urgent 'action items' so that we can stop these dangerous nuclear proliferation activities. I urge you to act on her suggestions.

*************

Luke Ryland: What do you have to say about the recent work by the Insight journalists - Chris Gourlay, Jonathan Calvert, Joe Lauria - at the UK's Times?

Sibel Edmonds: They've done good, solid reporting so far by doing what reporters are supposed to. They have been chasing sources and getting their hands on documents. It's pretty simple. As you know, this story has been available to any journalist for six years now.

There's been a lot of speculation in the last few weeks that American reporters haven't touched this story because they are 'corporate owned' but it is wrong to exonerate these reporters so quickly. Many of them are too close to their official sources, and some are simply lazy. This Times team chases sources, and if they can't reach them one way, they'll try and try again, or they'll seek out alternate sources, or find other ways to ensure that they get the story.

When I hear from US reporters, they say 'Sibel, give us all the documents we'll need, and you line up all the sources for us, and then maybe we'll do a story' and if one source doesn't return their phone call, they simply give up. That's not journalism!

Luke Ryland: Why has the US failed on this story so dramatically for 6 years?

Sibel Edmonds: It's a combination of things, obviously. You need to consider that the entire US press corps has failed on this story; not only the regular print and TV media, but the alternative media has failed on this too.

Part of the reason is that journalists are simply too close to their official sources. Those sources might tell the journalist that there's nothing to the story, and so the journalist gives up on it, or the official sources might 'request' that the journalist to stay away from the story, and the journalist is then concerned about losing access to the source in the future.

Another reason is the partisanship. With the foreign press, there is no partisanship, and that's one reason why they have been more effective at covering this case, and I'm not just talking about the recent Times articles here. With the US media, it appears as though if there is no clear partisan angle, then there's no story. As you know, this case is spread over two administrations, and that appears to make it difficult for the reporters to cover the story. Even within one news organization you might have one journalist who wants to use the story to indict Clinton, and another who wants to use the story to bash Bush, and in the end neither of them write about the story because it doesn't fit their partisanship, their 'narrative', so they just drop it altogether.

I had such high hopes for the alternative press, and they do a lot of good work, but partisanship repeatedly gets in the way there too, on both sides.

The US media also suffers from a pack mentality. I was told by one executive that they weren't doing the story because it was 'old news' because 60 Minutes did a single segment in October 2002, even though they only covered a tiny part of the case. This executive literally told me that he'd only cover the story if it was 'hot and sexy.' I often think that I'd need to be able to hire Britney Spears to be a spokesperson - and this is not just for my case, but for any of the many other solid, important cases at the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition. Apparently this is what it would take to get any coverage.

Of course, given the pack mentality, if any of these stories does become 'hot and sexy' then all the journalists focus on the same issues and there's no differentiation in their reporting.

The other major problem in the US is the focus on symptoms, rather than root causes. My case is a good example, but there are lots of others too. Look at the early reporting on my case in 2002, the Washington Post broke the story in July 2002 about the espionage in the translation bureau and then they dropped the story after two weeks. They stopped reporting on it when more important information came out and the State Secrets Privilege was invoked. To this day not a single US reporter has asked 'Why was the State Secrets Privilege been invoked here? What is going on?'

Just this week I was approached by a major US outlet who wanted to do a story on Kevin Taskesen! [Ed note: Taskesen was an incompetent FBI translator who got his job because his wife worked in the administrative office] This is absolutely the most trivial element of the case, and it has already been reported at length. I told them that they could learn everything they needed to know by watching 60 Minutes, 2002. Again, the US media needs to start looking at the root causes of these problems, not the symptoms.

Luke Ryland: Will the US media start reporting on this now that it is 'hot and sexy' again?

Sibel Edmonds: It's hard to know. After being told for years that they won't cover it because it is 'old news,' now there are certain officials in the agencies quietly telling journalists to stay away from the story because I came across a highly sensitive covert national security operation.

Also, Turkey's army of lobbyists in DC are very effective. The US press tends to stay away from any stories critical of Turkey, I would say even more than Israel.

There's also the possible problem of 'eating crow' but I hope this isn't an issue, this story is way too important for any of that. The information that has been published in the Times recently could have easily come out four years ago in the US press. We now need everyone to focus on the important issues.

I have one message for the US media: If they think this is over, it's not over. Much more will come out. They won't be able to ignore it any longer, and so I hope they get over any reluctance they might have.

Look at the positive press that the Times' series has received since their first article ran. Do you think their editors haven't noticed? The Times is adding more and more resources to the story, more journalists, bigger budgets, and more importantly, they are getting more and more sources coming forward to shed light on these illegal activities. As I have said from the beginning, this story is not about me, there are many sources who have been waiting for the right time to come forward, I've probably never even heard of most of them, and now they are coming forward. This will play out like Watergate played out, with the drip, drip, drip. So I say to everyone 'Buckle up, there's much more coming.'

So, hopefully American reporters will start to cover the story. I'm not particularly confident, but to a certain degree it doesn't matter that much because the internet and the blogs can spread the reporting from the UK as soon as it hits the wires.

Luke Ryland: Two weeks after the first article in the Times about the involvement of high-level US officials being involved with Turkish and Israeli interests in supplying the nuclear black market, President Bush quietly announced that the US will start supplying nuclear technology to Turkey. Do you think that is a coincidence?

Sibel Edmonds: The timing is certainly very, very suspicious. The proposals that are being floated are very suspicious too. There are reports that Turkey will build an enrichment facility, and that Turkey will become the key supplier of nuclear fuel to other Muslim countries who want nuclear power plants. None of this makes any sense.

And again, the US media is nowhere to be seen on this issue. Where are the journalists? Do you remember the noise made a couple of years ago when the US announced that it would supply India with nuclear technology? So far, nearly a week after the announcement and not a single major US media outlet has even reported on the deal! Think of the hypocrisy, with all the saber-rattling at Iran over enrichment.

If it's such a good idea to sell nuclear technology to Turkey, why isn't the White House out there selling the idea? Where are the arguments in the press saying that this will be good for regional stability, or that it will help reduce demand for oil, or even that it is simply good business because US firms will be able to sell their hardware and knowledge? There's nothing! Silence. What does that tell you?

Luke Ryland: What needs to be done?

Sibel Edmonds: The way they've structured this deal is that Congress has 90 days from the announcement, now 84 days, to block the 'agreement' otherwise it basically becomes law.

The first thing that we need to do is to make sure that this doesn't 'automatically' become law. We need the journalists, the experts, and the bloggers to raise hell over this issue, and we need to make sure that Congress investigates this properly before rubber-stamping it. The clock is ticking and we need to act now.

As you know, and this was even published in the White House press release on this issue, certain 'Turkish private entities' have been involved 'in certain activities directly relating to nuclear proliferation.' This includes supplying the A.Q. Khan network - which built Pakistan's nuclear bomb, and also supplied North Korea, Iran and other countries - but as the recent Times stories indicate, so much more as well.

The White House press release states that all these issues have been resolved; that the Turkish government has addressed these issues, that the US government has evaluated these actions and that the US government is satisfied, and that all of this is secret, classified!

Given the track record of this administration in abusing classification and distorting intelligence, why on earth would we trust them with this? What is in the report? Is it truthful? Why is it classified? We saw these exact same people do the same thing in the late 80s when they enabled Pakistan to get nuclear weapons. Richard Barlow did his best to stop them then, but if Congress doesn't hold hearings this time around the same thing will happen again. We should have stopped Pakistan then, but unless this 'classified' report is made public and the contents publicly debated, then the Barlow of today won't even get the chance to debunk whatever is in that 'classified' report. What conceivable logic is there in classifying the details of how Turkey has cleaned up its act regarding nuclear proliferation? If they have, they should be proud of it!

There are many great anti-proliferation organizations out there, we need to rally all of them, and all of the 'pro-transparency' organizations, to this cause. We need journalists to contact these experts for their opinion and expertise, and we need these experts to contact journalists to ensure that the story, and the issues, is covered, and covered thoroughly.

We also need to recruit bloggers and alternative media to keep the pressure on. Perhaps a 'countdown clock' as we count down the 90 days might help.

Luke Ryland: What are the next steps in the process?

Sibel Edmonds: I'm not exactly sure of the process at the moment, but it has been reported that this 'automatically' becomes law after the 90 days, somehow, unless Congress blocks or amends the legislation.

Apparently the approval process somehow includes convincing the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee not to object, so those committees appear to be our first firewall.

(Ed note: Senate Foreign Relations Committee includes Joe Biden (Chair), Chris Dodd, John Kerry, Russ Feingold, Barbara Boxer, Barack Obama and Jim Webb for the Democrats, and Richard Lugar, Chuck Hagel and George Voinovich for the minority. Hopefully one of them will stand up on this important issue. The House side looks more difficult, the Chairman is Tom Lantos who was listed in Sibel's Rogue's Gallery, which apparently identifies 18 of the guilty parties in her case, so that might be a problem. Ron Paul is also on that committee, he might be a prime target for this campaign.)

Luke Ryland: Is there anything else we can do?

Sibel Edmonds: There is one other hope. As last week's White House press release states, Bill Clinton tried to pass this legislation in 2000 but "immediately after" Clinton tried to send it to Congress it was blocked because some people apparently highlighted Turkish involvement in the nuclear black market and, who knows, maybe threatened to blow the whistle. Those same individuals, and others like them, can stop this again, and they should do everything they can to make sure that this doesn't happen. They should try to do it internally, and if they can't do it internally, then they need reach out to journalists, either on or off the record. Hopefully some honest, dedicated people will try to block it again, but we can't rely on that. We need to pressure congress to ensure that this doesn't go through.

Time is running out, the countdown clock is ticking down, and we need to stop this now. We need the help of journalists, congress, nuclear proliferation experts, bloggers and those active citizens in the blogosphere and elsewhere.

--------------

Many thanks to Sibel, as always.

Please do what you can to help block this proposed legislation.

If you can create a 'countdown clock' please contact me, and we'll offer it so that everyone can place it on their blogs and use it in their sigs etc.

-------------

Regarding alternative media, Sibel is particularly grateful to American Conservative and Antiwar.com for their objectivity and non-partisanship in covering this case. In particular, Phil Giraldi, Justin Raimondo, Joshua Frank and Scott Horton.

To reiterate Sibel's emphasis on the importance of the internet to help get the story out, Daily Kos statistics for the week Jan 19-25 have been released. During a primary week when many were (rightly) complaining that campaign diaries made it almost impossible for other issues to get any attention, diaries related to Sibel's case dominated the list. Sibel's story was both #1 and $2 for the week, and filled 3 of the top 11, and 4 of the top 25 diaries. Statistics at Democratic Underground will demonstrate the same level of interest in the case. Thank you to all of you, and I ask that you continue to support the case, and I ask that journalists and bloggers pick up the story and support the great work done by the Times. It's about time, no?

--------------

(Email me if you want to be added to my Sibel email list. Subject: 'Sibel email list')

UK Times: Official Documents Prove FBI lied to protect US officials

2008-01-20T18:00:00.000+11:00

The UK's Sunday Times has another explosive article out tonight.

THE FBI has been accused of covering up a key case file detailing evidence against corrupt government officials and their dealings with a network stealing nuclear secrets.

The Times has obtained official documents which prove that the FBI is lying about the existence of a counterintelligence operation targeting high-level US officials and Turkish operatives.

The FBI's comments demonstrate conclusively that either:
a) They are lying, or
b) They have destroyed the evidence of this multi-year investigation concerning the corruption of high-level US officials, the nuclear black market, money laundering and narcotics trafficking.

****

The revelations in the Times are also the first known incident where official FBI documents have been leaked to the press confirming the FBI's counterintelligence operations targeting Turkish operatives in US. According to the Times, these operations have been taking place since 1996.

Destruction of Evidence?
The Times has obtained an official FBI document which confirms the existence of the Turkish counter-intelligence operation, including the official Case Number of the operation. This case number, 203A-WF-210023, has been very tightly held because it directly ties the Turkish operation to specific documents and wiretaps which can then be used as evidence.

The FBI has, till recently, been very careful not to respond to any requests that might disclose, confirm or deny any information in this matter, however:

...the FBI responded to a freedom of information request for a file of exactly the same number by claiming that it did not exist. But The Sunday Times has obtained a document signed by an FBI official showing the existence of the file.

With the FBI claiming that these documents don't exist, we must conclude either that they are demonstrably lying, or that they have destroyed all the evidence.

Unfortunately for the FBI, we are aware of at least two other cases where this operation was referenced, and those references were documented outside the FBI. The first case was that of former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds; her case was reported by the Justice Department's Inspector General, as well as the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the second case was that of former FBI Special Agent Gilbert Graham, whose cases was also documented in Congress and by the Inspector General.

If the FBI is telling the truth that these documents do not (currently) exist, then the FBI must have destroyed them. Did they destroy ALL the copies that existed? Did the FBI retrieve ALL the copies and references seen by the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Inspector General's report which was seen by Henry Waxman's office and perhaps elsewhere? How far did they go to retrieve the evidence? We do know that in May 2004, two years after the Senate Judiciary Committee held unclassified hearings into Sibel's case, the Department of Justice retroactively classified details of those hearings. Did the DoJ destroy all the evidence, and all the case files, at the same time?

We also know that at least one other FBI Special Agent filed classified protected reports in early 2002. Special Agent Gilbert Graham, one of Sibel's bosses, worked on "counterintelligence investigations involved espionage activities by Turkish officials and agents in the United States." Graham's primary concern, according to the unclassified version of his filings was that the FBI was using phony FISA warrants to spy on "high-profile U.S. public officials."

Gilbert Graham's filings with the Inspector General, as well as his evidence to the Senate Judiciary Committee certainly contained the relevant Case Numbers that the FBI is now denying exists. Were all of Graham's reports destroyed too?

For years, Sibel has challenged US officials: (youtube):

"We have the facts, we have the documents, we have the witnesses. Put out the tapes, put out the documents, put out the intercepts. Put out the truth."

The FBI is apparently still obstructing justice, and still blocking the truth from coming out.

Asked for a comment, Sibel said:

"I cannot comment on the contents of the case file, however I can tell you with 100% certainty that the FBI lied when they said that it doesn't exist."

The FBI/DoJ is currently investigating the CIA's destruction of evidence, the torture/interrogation tapes of al-Qa'ida suspect Abu Zubaydah and others. If they have destroyed all the evidence in this Turkish Counter-Intelligence operation, how can they possibly be trusted to investigate the CIA's destruction of evidence?

Brewster Jennings
The official document obtained by The Times has some very damning evidence regarding Marc Grossman, former #3 at the State Department and former Ambassador to Turkey. Two weeks ago, The Times ran an explosive article detailing how Marc Grossman was a mole for foreign criminal groups which stole American nuclear secrets and sold them to the highest bidder.

According to the latest Times article, they have an anonymous letter which:

claims the government official [Grossman] warned a Turkish member of the network that they should not deal with a company called Brewster Jennings because it was a CIA front company investigating the nuclear black market. The official’s warning came two years before Brewster Jennings was publicly outed when one of its staff, Valerie Plame, was revealed to be a CIA agent in a case that became a cause célèbre in the US.

Former CIA agent Phil Giraldi, who was stationed in Turkey, is another who is familiar with these matters. Giraldi wrote a terrific article for the American Conservative in 2006 describing Sibel's case. In Kill The Messenger, a documentary about the nuclear black market element of Sibel case, Giraldi says:

"And that Brewster Jennings was, apparently, working against the target of Turkey, meaning that Turkey was being investigated by the CIA as a proliferator of weapons."

One of Brewster Jennings targets was the American Turkish Council, a lobbying group known to be a hub of the activity facilitating the theft and sale of nuclear secrets, among other things.

Journalist Chris Deliso wrote a terrific article in Nov 2005 linking Marc Grossman, Brewster Jennings, the American Turkish Council and the Turkish connection to the nuclear black market. Although the new Times article doesn't mention Grossman by name, it is clear that Grossman is again the unnamed former official in this article.

Crimes, Cover-ups, and... Consequences?
We are all familiar with the cliche that 'the cover-up is worse than the crime,' but that is often nonsense. Just as in the CIA tape destruction case, here we have rational people making 'rational' decisions, not in the heat of the moment, to commit felonies by destroying evidence of treason amongst other crimes. The original crimes are much worse than the cover-up, and the guilty parties know it, that's why they decided to destroy and cover up all of the evidence.

Will Congress finally hold hearings into the foreign criminal penetration of every branch of the US government which has been repeatedly corroborated?

We have the crimes, we have the cover-ups, where are the consequences?

*******************
Digg THis

(Email me if you want to be added to my Sibel email list. Subject: 'Sibel email list')

Gary Hood

2008-01-14T10:21:00.000+11:00

Flashback:

This song by Gary Hood about Sibel is in Kill The Messenger

Statement from Mathieu Verboud

2008-01-13T14:32:00.000+11:00

Here is a statement from Mathieu Verboud, French co-director of Kill The Messenger, regarding last week's blockbuster front page Sunday Times article about the nuclear black market element of Sibel's case.

I am very happy that Sibel has come forward like this, with this superb Sunday Times article. I believe this article to have utmost credibility and I also think that she has gone as far as she could humanly go. Now the spitting Naja should run for cover for a while...

There are new elements in the article that are of particular importance, because they show beyond reasonable doubt that a system was at work. Does this ring any bell with the U.S mainstream media, or with the Democratic Congress? We'll see. One sometimes wonders if they even comprehend that what Sibel witnessed was something "systemic," not just one-shots. And the answer is 'of course they understand.' That's why they keep silent.

Silent, but in the face of what? Here we have a hostile foreign group operating in the U.S with agents/moles inside the system, meaning Americans (not foreigners), Americans with positions at the very top of the administration. FBI wiretaps show that the system is well-designed, with specific tasks for each member: for example the "U.S State Department official" was to provide for moles, and to provide for help when needed. The wiretaps also monitor every step of the way of the progress made by these hostile people.... FBI wiretaps show that the head of the Pakistani side of the operation was no other than General Mahmoud Ahmad, then the ISI chief. Quote from the article:
" (...) Intercepted communications showed Ahmad and his colleagues stationed in Washington were in constant contact with attachés in the Turkish embassy."
General Mahmood Ahmad? This name in itself should trigger the investigation of the millenium. Who is he? Nothing but a major key to a full understanding of 9.11. Let's read about him on the Co-operative Research website.

Ahmed's connection with Mohamed Atta is well-known (fully documented? It's probably another story). His connection with Islamists is well-known.

This ISI general, who started defining himself as a "born again Muslim" at the end of the 90's, is also famous for his whereabouts on September 11, 2001. That day, he had official meetings in Washington with three U.S Congressmen, then-CIA chief George Tenet, and, most importantly, also with a State Department official, whose name is no other than Marc Grossman, I guess the very same "U.S State Department official" that Sibel named to the Sunday Times but whose name the journal decided not to publish. The very same Marc Grossman who, after a short stint as a diplomat in Pakistan in the late 70's (he was there at the time when general Zia had Benazir Bhutto's father hanged) became U.S ambassador to Turkey in the 1990's. And those who know Sibel's cause know how strategic it is for a "U.S State Department official" to have such a position in Turkey.

The press can, reasonably, say they have no proof (a good excuse for not going at it, but anyway)... Things should be different with the Congress and the Justice System though...

Let's not forget that they have recently opened highly-sensitive investigations on high-profile cases, cases that overlaps pretty heavily with Sibel's case! I mean the Office of Special Plans case (this Pentagon group, now known for its role in the run up to the war in Iraq, a place filled with extreme-right wing neocons know for their links with Israeli, Turkish and now Pakistani interests) and I also mean the Larry Franklin case (the Sunday Times article connects this case to Sibel's quite convincingly). So... I believe what's already here should be more than enough for Congress to start opening or widening its investigations.

Of course, most of the story exposed in the Sunday Times article is told in our film, Kill The Messenger, and I am proud that we were correct at the time. The article has elements that we also had back at the time of filming in 2005-2006 (like the fascinating PhD students trick)... but could not include, for practical reasons. I am glad to see Sibel herself filling in these gaps herself, so bravely, as always.

The picture is clear, the pattern is clear. Yet, if people in the U.S or elsewhere don't feel concerned that prominent neocons and other top U.S officials (most with a strong Israeli slant) engage in nuclear black market and drug dealings with Turkish & Pakistani officials (most with an Islamist slant), well then Stanley Kubrick did his "Doctor Strangelove" for nothing!

... But isn't the full name of Kubrick's film "Doctor Strangelove or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb"?

Thanks Mathieu.

Sibel 'names names' (in pictures!)

2008-01-12T15:30:00.000+11:00

Over at Sibel's website, she has published "Sibel Edmonds’ State Secrets Privilege Gallery" - twenty one photos of people.

Sibel doesn't say anything about the photos - or the people in the photos - but we can reasonably presume that they are the 21 guilty people in her case.

Sibel has broken the photos into three different groups.

The first group contains current and former Pentagon and State Department officials.

Richard Perle

Douglas Feith

Eric Edelman

Marc Grossman

Brent Scowcroft

Larry Franklin

The second group is current and former congressmen

Dennis Hastert - Ex-House Speaker (R-Il)

Roy Blount - ( R, Mo)

Dan Burton - (R - IN)

Tom Lantos - (D- CA)

?

Bob Livingston - ex-Speaker of the House (R-LA)

Stephen Solarz (D-Ny)

The 3rd group includes people who all appear to work at think tanks - primarily WINEP, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy

Graham E. Fuller - RAND

David Makovsky - WINEP

Alan Makovsky - WINEP

?

?

Yusuf Turani (President-in-exile, Turkistan)

Professor Sabri Sayari (Georgetown, WINEP)

Mehmet Eymur (Former head Turkish counter-terrorism, MIT)

As you can see, there are a couple of 'Question Marks' instead of photos. I'm not sure why that is the case.

I'll have some more later, obviously.

Sibel Edmonds case: Front page of the (UK) papers (finally)

2008-01-12T15:13:00.000+11:00

There's a remarkable article For sale: West’s deadly nuclear secrets on the front page of the British Times today.

A WHISTLEBLOWER (Sibel Edmonds) has made a series of extraordinary claims about how corrupt government officials allowed Pakistan and other states to steal nuclear weapons secrets.
[...]
Edmonds described how foreign intelligence agents had enlisted the support of US officials to acquire a network of moles in sensitive military and nuclear institutions.

Sibel is in serious danger as a result of this article. Please support her by distributing widely.

(Please note that the Times article is long, and I've tried to stay within the parameters of Fair Use. Please go read the whole thing)

From the article:

Edmonds described how foreign intelligence agents had enlisted the support of US officials to acquire a network of moles in sensitive military and nuclear institutions.

Among the hours of covert tape recordings, she says she heard evidence that one well-known senior official in the US State Department was being paid by Turkish agents in Washington who were selling the information on to black market buyers, including Pakistan.

The article doesn't name the official, but he is Marc Grossman, former #3 at the State Department, former ambassador to Turkey, and current Vice President at The Cohen Group, the lobbying company run by former Secretary of Defense William Cohen.

(Sibel) claims that the FBI was also gathering evidence against senior Pentagon officials – including household names – who were aiding foreign agents.

“If you made public all the information that the FBI have on this case, you will see very high-level people going through criminal trials,” she said.

Those household names include Richard Perle and Douglas Feith and possibly Paul Wolfowitz. Less familiar names include Eric Edelman, Feith's replacement at the Pentagon, and former Congressman Stephen Solarz.

(Sibel's) story shows just how much the West was infiltrated by foreign states seeking nuclear secrets. It illustrates how western government officials turned a blind eye to, or were even helping, countries such as Pakistan acquire bomb technology.

I'd quibble with this a little, Sibel has repeatedly said that her case involves criminal infiltration, not state-based espionage. As I wrote back in 2006:

"Sibel's case is about the systematic, long-term, for-profit, looting of US nuclear secrets (and who knows what else) by criminal organizations who then sell the nuclear technology to the highest bidder(s) - including terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda.

To make matters worse, this has been taking place with the full knowledge of the US government."

Back to The Times:

The wider nuclear network has been monitored for many years by a joint Anglo-American intelligence effort. But rather than shut it down, investigations by law enforcement bodies such as the FBI and Britain’s Revenue & Customs have been aborted to preserve diplomatic relations.

Again, I'd quibble with the purported reason for why the investigations were shut down. It may be true that diplomatic relations were at stake, but it's also true that the people at the Pentagon and the State Dept who repeatedly shut down the investigations were also personally profiting from the whole enterprise, which may have (ahem) coloured their decision making process.

Here Sibel describes how investigations were shut down, despite the protestations of FBI agents (she also names Grossman here)

It's also important to note that they haven't specified which 'diplomatic relations' are at stake here. It's not just Pakistan. As Sibel said:

We don’t know what diplomatic relations they are referring to. They must be ashamed of it! They don’t want to mention it. So we have certain diplomatic relations that prevent criminals being prosecuted here. And I am talking about criminals in the United States of America.

The Times article then describes an FBI investigation into "links between the Turks and Pakistani, Israeli and US targets":

The Turks and Israelis had planted “moles” in military and academic institutions which handled nuclear technology. Edmonds says there were several transactions of nuclear material every month, with the Pakistanis being among the eventual buyers. “The network appeared to be obtaining information from every nuclear agency in the United States,” she said.

They were helped, she says, by (Marc Grossman) who provided some of their moles – mainly PhD students – with security clearance to work in sensitive nuclear research facilities. These included the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory in New Mexico, which is responsible for the security of the US nuclear deterrent.
[...]
The Turks, she says, often acted as a conduit for the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s spy agency, because they were less likely to attract suspicion...

The article goes on to describe how the head of the ISI, General Mahmoud Ahmad, is a supporter of al-Qaeda, including partly financing the 911 terrorist attacks, and is also good friends with AQ Khan. Obviously the nuclear secrets stolen from the US fed directly into Pakistan's nuclear program, and also into Khan's proliferation network. The so-called 'AQ Khan network' provided the nuclear programs of Iran, North Korea, Libya, and possibly up to a dozen other countries. Not only that, immediately prior to 911, Osama Bin Laden met with people in Khan's network with the aim of al-Qaeda acquiring nukes.

The article also describes how the ISI 'penetrated' the FBI translation unit in DC where Sibel worked, in much the same way that the Turkish network had placed moles there - enabling them to block important translations, steal incriminating documents, and recruit others to conduct espionage within the translation unit. Remarkably, this 'penetration' was not the result of remarkable sneakiness and superior spy-craft by the ISI and the Turkish networks - all evidence in both cases indicates that the penetration was condoned & enabled by senior people within the US government. Former FBI counterintelligence veteran John Cole (and others, including Sibel) describes the placement, despite his objections, of ISI operatives in the translation unit here.

The Times article then notes something that I reported 18 months ago. Immediately after 911, the FBI arrested a bunch of people suspected of being involved with the attacks - including four associates of key targets of FBI's counterintelligence operations. Sibel heard the targets tell Marc Grossman: "We need to get them out of the US because we can’t afford for them to spill the beans." Grossman duly facilitated their release from jail and the suspects immediately left the country without further investigation or interrogation.

Let me repeat that for emphasis: The #3 guy at the State Dept facilitated the immediate release of 911 suspects at the request of targets of the FBI's investigation.

Back to The Times:

Edmonds also claims that a number of senior officials in the Pentagon had helped Israeli and Turkish agents.

“The people provided lists of potential moles from Pentagon-related institutions who had access to databases concerning this information,” she said.

“The handlers, who were part of the diplomatic community, would then try to recruit those people to become moles for the network. The lists contained all their ‘hooking points’, which could be financial or sexual pressure points, their exact job in the Pentagon and what stuff they had access to.”

The article notes that Larry Franklin was one of those implicated in the scheme. However, Sibel has previously noted that Franklin was essentially a pawn in the system. More significant is the fact that high-level Pentagon officials were maintaining 'dossiers' on the sexual and financial proclivities of their underlings in order to be able to blackmail them.

I know that many of you have been (rightly) concerned about FISA, and many of you have (rightly) been confused by the inexplicable behaviour of Democrats in Congress, and wonder why they behave as though they are being blackmailed.

Now you know.

If any American journalists/media wants to step up, please remember that the nuclear black market story covered by The Times is just one element of Sibel's case.

Bradblog has more

(Email me if you want to be added to my Sibel email list. Subject: 'Sibel email list')

Some recent articles

2008-01-08T16:21:00.000+11:00

Here are some more recent posts from Let Sibel Edmonds Speak

* Sibel Edmonds Case & Destruction of Evidence

* '3 months' in the life of Sibel Edmonds

* Sibel Edmonds Case: Benazir and The 'Islamic' Bomb

* Sibel Edmonds Case: 'Obstruction' & the 911 Commission

* Sibel Edmonds case: Front page of the (UK) papers (finally)

* Sibel 'names names' (in pictures!)

some new videos

2007-12-07T20:28:00.001+11:00

Here's some new video goodness, much of it © Kill The Messenger

Sibel Edmonds, Greatest Hits

Keith Olbermann, Sibel Edmonds: Government Secrets & Crimes

Sibel Edmonds supporters speak out: Credible, Hero

Some recent posts

2007-11-03T23:32:00.000+11:00

Here are some links to some recent posts that I've written:

Sibel Edmonds, the back-story

FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds: 'I Will Tell All, & Name (new) Names'

Sibel Edmonds case: The real culprits of 911

FBI divulges secrets in Sibel Edmonds case.

Who are the FBI 'Juice men' in Sibel Edmonds case?

Sibel Edmonds, NSA Spying, State Secrets and Kafka

Sibel Edmonds ACLU speech

Sibel Edmonds' case and the heroin connection

2007-08-14T21:39:00.000+10:00

Everyone is talking about "How a ‘Good War’ in Afghanistan Went Bad" in yesterday's NYT - but what stands out for me is that in a 7-page article on Afghanistan, there's not one mention of heroin, opium, or even poppies.

As a companion piece to the NYT article about losing the 'good war,' I strongly suggest that you read this recent article by former UK Ambassador to Uzebekistan, Craig Murray from late last month. Murray explains that Afghanistan is run by drug lords.

Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds often points to the fact that whenever the media does mention the heroin industry, they almost never go beyond reporting about the poor farmers in the Afghan poppy fields. Sibel asks the leading question: "Who are the real lords of Afghanistan’s poppy fields?"

Before I proceed, let's start with a little background into Sibel's case. When Sibel worked as a translator for the FBI, one of the main cases she was working on was a counter-intelligence operation against Turkey's equivalent of AIPAC, the American Turkish Council (ATC). On the Turkish side, the ATC is (largely) represented by Turkey's "Deep State – the politicians, military officers and intelligence officials who worked with drug bosses to move drugs from Afghanistan..." (On the American side, the ATC is represented by the 'Defense' contractors, and Turkey's American lobbyists - people like Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, former House Speaker Bob Livingston, former Defense Secretary William Cohen, former Minority Leader Dick Gephardt and others.)

Now, we've all heard the statistics that Afghanistan is the source of 90% of the world's opium etc - but what many people don't know is that most of that opium is imported into Turkey where it is transformed, on an industrial scale, into heroin. It is warehoused on an industrial scale, repackaged and marketed on an industrial scale, and re-exported on an industrial scale.

As Sibel says:

"This multi billion-dollar industry requires highly sophisticated networks and people. So, who are the real lords of Afghanistan’s poppy fields?
[snip]
These operations are run by mafia groups closely controlled by the MIT (Turkish Intelligence Agency) and the military. According to statistics compiled in 1998, Turkey’s heroin trafficking brought in $25 billion in 1995 and $37.5 billion in 1996. That amount makes up nearly a quarter of Turkey’s GDP. Only criminal networks working in close cooperation with the police and the army could possibly organize trafficking on such a scale. The Turkish government, MIT and the Turkish military, not only sanctions, but also actively participates in and oversees the narcotics activities and networks.

In other words, the folks who supply much of the world's heroin break bread (and share lots of dough) with their American counterparts at places like the American Turkish Council.

Sibel says that there are at least four people in Congress that she knows of who are being bribed by the Turkish gang, and according to Ed Bradley on 60 Minutes, they also have "spies... inside the US State Department and at the Pentagon."

In Craig Murray's article, he notes all of the impressive statistics regarding Afghanistan's opium production - 2006 beat the previous record by 60%, and this year promises to be stronger still - and then he makes two important points. Firstly, he says that all of the 'value-add' activity that was previously performed in Turkey (turning poppies into heroin) is now conducted within Afghanistan. We don't know whether this is a massive shift in the underlying structure of the industry, or whether the incumbent gangs that Sibel refers to have simply decided to 'off-shore' their production from Turkey to Afghanistan. I suspect that it is the latter, simply because we haven't seen the type of blood-bath that we would expect to see if there was a serious turf-war taking place.

From Murray's piece:

" According to the United Nations, 2006 was the biggest opium harvest in history, smashing the previous record by 60 per cent. This year will be even bigger.

Our economic achievement in Afghanistan goes well beyond the simple production of raw opium. In fact Afghanistan no longer exports much raw opium at all. It has succeeded in what our international aid efforts urge every developing country to do. Afghanistan has gone into manufacturing and 'value-added' operations.

It now exports not opium, but heroin. Opium is converted into heroin on an industrial scale, not in kitchens but in factories. Millions of gallons of the chemicals needed for this process are shipped into Afghanistan by tanker. The tankers and bulk opium lorries on the way to the factories share the roads, improved by American aid, with Nato troops.

(FTR, I have seen no evidence for Murray's claim that Afghanistan is now primarily exporting heroin rather than opium)

The second point that Murray makes is that this activity takes place with the the active participation of the authorities, just as Sibel said was the case in Turkey.

Murray:

How can this have happened, and on this scale? The answer is simple. The four largest players in the heroin business are all senior members of the Afghan government – the government that our soldiers are fighting and dying to protect.

When we attacked Afghanistan, America bombed from the air while the CIA paid, armed and equipped the dispirited warlord drug barons – especially those grouped in the Northern Alliance – to do the ground occupation. We bombed the Taliban and their allies into submission, while the warlords moved in to claim the spoils. Then we made them ministers.

President Karzai is a good man. He has never had an opponent killed, which may not sound like much but is highly unusual in this region and possibly unique in an Afghan leader. But nobody really believes he is running the country. He asked America to stop its recent bombing campaign in the south because it was leading to an increase in support for the Taliban. The United States simply ignored him. Above all, he has no control at all over the warlords among his ministers and governors, each of whom runs his own kingdom and whose primary concern is self-enrichment through heroin.

More Murray:

He became concerned at the vast amounts of heroin coming from Afghanistan, in particular from the fiefdom of the (now) Head of the Afghan armed forces, General Abdul Rashid Dostum, in north and east Afghanistan.

Dostum is an Uzbek, and the heroin passes over the Friendship Bridge from Afghanistan to Uzbekistan, where it is taken over by President Islam Karimov's people...

The heroin Jeeps run from General Dostum to President Karimov. The UK, United States and Germany have all invested large sums in donating the most sophisticated detection and screening equipment to the Uzbek customs centre at Termez to stop the heroin coming through.

But the convoys of Jeeps running between Dostum and Karimov are simply waved around the side of the facility.

More Murray:

"In Afghanistan, General Dostum (Head of the Afghan armed forces)is vital to Karzai's coalition, and to the West's pretence of a stable, democratic government.

Opium is produced all over Afghanistan, but especially in the north and north-east – Dostum's territory. Again, our Government's spin doctors have tried hard to obscure this fact and make out that the bulk of the heroin is produced in the tiny areas of the south under Taliban control. But these are the most desolate, infertile rocky areas. It is a physical impossibility to produce the bulk of the vast opium harvest there.

That General Dostum is head of the Afghan armed forces and Deputy Minister of Defence is in itself a symbol of the bankruptcy of our policy. "

None of this information was included in the NYT's 7 page article on how we 'lost' Afghanistan.

In fact, in a fantastic recent interview, Sibel wonders aloud whether the media silence is intentional:

"Who prevents the media, or is it happening, from publishing the real facts? The Turks, their involvement, UAE and their position in laundering this money, Pakistan and narcotics. It's saying "Oops! They are our 'allies' and we don't want to touch them. We don't want to turn them off." In fact, we have a lot of business, "sensitive diplomatic relations", as John Ashcroft put it."

As if to prove Sibel's point, just last week, ABC's blog The Blotter reported:

Heroin Found in Car Allegedly Owned by Top Afghan Border Official

A manhunt is on in Afghanistan for the man President Hamid Karzai wanted to name head of his country's border police, ABC News has learned, following the discovery that the official owned a car filled with heroin intercepted by members of the Kabul City Criminal Investigations Division.

U.S. authorities confirmed the seizure of 130 kilograms of heroin in June in a car that allegedly belonged to Haji Zahir Qadir, the former chief of the border police for northern Takhar province.

Haji Zahir was not in the car when it was intercepted. His cousin and "right hand," Bilal, was present and arrested.

Afghan officials say Karzai wanted to name Haji Zahir to head the border police, but a U.S. military intelligence assessment obtained by ABC News in 2006 named Zahir as a drug smuggler.

News of the seizure and the manhunt came at a most embarrassing time for Karzai, who was at Camp David with President George Bush to meet on regional issues, including the upsurge in violence in Afghanistan and cross-border issues with Pakistan.

The information fed to The Blotter was apparently designed to cause some embarrassment (coming 6 weeks after the event), but it wasn't very embrassing at all. As best as I could tell, ABC's blog entry was the only mention of this story at all, anywhere (1,2,3).

For more on my coverage of the heroin angle of Sibel's case, see Sibel Edmonds: America's Watergate, Sibel Edmonds & the Neocons' Turkish Gravy-Train, and Daniel Ellsberg: Hastert got suitcases of Al Qaeda heroin cash, should be in jail.

I'll give Craig Murray the final word:

"Remember this article next time you hear a politician calling for more troops to go into Afghanistan. And when you hear of another brave British life wasted there, remember you can add to the casualty figures all the young lives ruined, made miserable or ended by heroin in the UK.

They, too, are casualties of our Afghan policy."

Let Sibel Edmonds Speak
~~Call~~ Embarrass Waxman. Demand public open hearings:
DC phone: (202) 225-3976
LA phone: 323 651-1040
Capitol switchboard phone: 800-828-0498

(let me know if you want to be added to my email list for new Sibel-related post. Subject: 'Sibel email list.')

Henry Waxman finally speaks out on Sibel Edmonds Case!

2007-08-14T21:38:00.002+10:00

For months we have been trying to get Henry Waxman to hold hearings into the case of former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds but we have been met with a stony silence.

Until now!

The Hollywood Liberal snagged an interview with Henry Waxman and asked about Sibel's case.

The full interview is 25 mins long. I've posted the relevant 3-minute audio snippet here.

Transcript:

Hollywood Liberal: From what I understand Ms. Edmonds was a translator and an FBI whistleblower and uncovered a case that involved The American Turkish Council who is Turkey’s main lobbying group in the US. Turkey receives Billions of dollars in aid from the US. The case involves vast corruption at the State Department including drug running, trading state secrets, arms trading, and the trading of Nuclear information and implicates, according to Ms. Edmonds, Neocons like Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, and Dennis Hastert, The ATC, AIPAC, and Democratic and Republican congressmen. From what I understand you promised to hold hearings into this matter, those hearings have not happened. Will they? And if not why not?

Henry Waxman: Wow! (laughs) That's one hell of a conspiracy theory you've got there. Can you please slow down a bit and repeat that? (laughs) I think, if I heard you correctly, you just said that Perle, Feith, Hastert and AIPAC are involved in, what did you say? Drug running, arms trading and the nuclear black market market (laughs)? Well, if you and/or Sibel have any evidence of this I'd sure like to hear about it!!! That certainly sounds like a job for the Government Reform and Oversight Committee! If you can provide me with any witnesses or documents or anything, we'll have the hearings as soon as possible! If what you say is true, then these people should be held accountable! This sounds like treason!

Actually, that exchange didn't really happen. I fabricated Waxman's entire response. The fictional response would have been appropriate though, don't you think? But that's not how he responded.

Here is the actual exchange:

Hollywood Liberal: From what I understand Ms. Edmonds was a translator and an FBI whistleblower and uncovered a case that involved The American Turkish Council who is Turkey’s main lobbying group in the US. Turkey receives Billions of dollars in aid from the US. The case involves vast corruption at the State Department including drug running, trading state secrets, arms trading, and the trading of Nuclear information and implicates, according to Ms. Edmonds, Neocons like Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, and Dennis Hastert, The ATC, AIPAC, and Democratic and Republican congressmen. From what I understand you promised to hold hearings into this matter, those hearings have not happened. Will they? And if not why not?

Henry Waxman: I don’t recall that I ever said that I was going to hold hearings on her specific case.... But I really don’t particularly have a comment on her case.

Hollywood Liberal: Would you consider holding hearings on what she has to say based on the fact that she was with the State Department, or the FBI, pretty high up, pretty credible witness.

Henry Waxman: I know my staff has been in touch with her case, and maybe with her, and her supporters. I don’t want to say at this point that we are going to hold a hearing on her specific issue. There are lots and lots of matters to pursue for matters of investigation of oversight. And we are working as hard as we can. We’ll look at in the context of all the other issues we want to pursue.

For the record, as an aside, immediately prior to Waxman saying 'I don't recall,' this exchange took place:

"Hollywood Liberal: And there seems to be a lot of this “I don’t recall” going on with members of the Bush Administration isn’t there?

Henry Waxman: Absolutely Alberto Gonzalez is the best example of a man who uses that exact excuse over and over again."

Heh.

I've put together a youtube video with some of Sibel's substantive comments, with Waxman's weasely statements juxtaposed against Alberto Gonzales' recent 'I don't recall' testimony. Is it a cheap shot? Maybe. Maybe not. I'm furious, disgusted, and don't care at this point.

But consider my fictitious, hypothetical response that Waxman could have delivered, and compare it with his actual response. That dog didn't bark.

Here are Sibel's extended comments that I used in the video:

Some respected, great Representatives, Democratic Congressmen, have expressed interest in my case. The leader of that group was Congressman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), and I briefed his staff several times, by giving them the same details I gave five years ago to the Judiciary Committee. They obtained the classified version of the Inspector General’s report two years ago and they were outraged. I have several letters from Congressman Waxman saying he finds these actions against me and these gag orders stunning and that he would hold hearings into my case if it wasn't for the Republicans preventing a hearing from taking place on my case.

Well, in January, after we went through the change [in Congress], Congressman Waxman is now Chairman Waxman and there is no power within Congress that can prevent him from holding this hearing. He has the jurisdiction, the authority to put the hearing there, and I have already obtained the consent and names of conscientious, good agents. One of them was the head of the Turkish counter-intelligence operations who actually retired two years ago. They’re all willing to come forward and testify on all the issues I have been gagged on. And that gag doesn’t work in Congress during a hearing.

So in January, after the election results, especially since we have such a great Chairman today, 30 organizations have put together this petition addressed to Chairman Waxman saying you have been promising us for the past five years. These are major organizations, and we call them transpartisan, because there are organizations from the right, organizations from the left, organizations that are whistleblower-related such as the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), the Government Accountability Project (GAP), the National Whistleblower Center, human rights organizations, the National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC), civil liberties-related organizations such as the American Civil Liberties union (ACLU). We have 30 solid organizations that came together and put together this petition, addressed to Chairman Waxman, saying 'You have been promising us for the past five years.'

According to the ACLU, there has been no case of an American citizen who has had so many gag orders issued on her.

We also had 15,000 citizens sign the petition, and we had these 30 organizations, and they delivered it to Chairman Waxman’s office in March 2007, just over a month ago. And based on the office’s own report, tens of thousands of people in the past 3-4 weeks have called to say, well, when are you going to hold a hearing?

But we have received no response and we don’t know why. None of these organizations know why, because Waxman's office has all the facts, they have all the confirmation, they have the IG report, they have the executive branch’s own report saying she’s credible and her allegations have been supported by other witnesses and documents. We are not talking about allegations. We are talking about facts, documented and witnessed facts.

And I still believe that the Americans who care about their rights, their country, can make this happen. Maybe it hasn’t happened because one of the factors that is not present there is the mainstream media. We know the mainstream media has such influence over the Congress, whatever makes the headlines. If issue ABC is in the headlines right now, I Congresswoman, Congressman am going to hold a hearing and get facetime and media time and attention - sometimes for good reasons, I'm not saying for negative reasons, but media has not paid attention.

Maybe Congress is not finding it worthy of their attention despite all these severe consequences because the media isn’t there.

The citizens can change this, the constituents of Chairman Henry Waxman in California, in the LA area, can change that. They can say, you represent us, you represent our interests, and you are the chairman of the Government Reform Committee. Government Reform. Well, this is about bringing reform into Government, this is about reforming the wrongdoings in our government, and the price is being paid by every citizen.

So after not hearing back from Chairman Waxman through this petition and 30 organizations, I’m trying to reach out to those constituents in California, I’m trying to reach out to all citizens in this country and say, forget about me, this is not about Sibel Edmonds. Let’s go to the core issues: What was it that I reported that caused all these gag orders and firings and threats? What was it? What I reported had nothing to do with me. It had to do with the interests of the American public being stomped upon. It had to do with those who have been elected and given authority betraying the citizens. It had to do with those people who are using their positions in the executive branch agencies to obtain lucrative early retirement positions afterwards as representatives of foreign interests, and not afterwards - and this is very important: In order to obtain it afterwards they had to serve those foreign interests while they were working and had those positions. That's how they earn those future positions, that's how it happens. In every single one of them, that’s how it happens. You start serving the interests of outside foreign influences before you obtain your positions afterwards and say bye to your civil service career. And that is, especially in some cases, criminal. That is not something that should be tolerated by this country, and we need to set an example of those people.

We have the facts, we have the documents, we have the witnesses, and it’s time to do it. So stand up and call Chairman Waxman’s office, keep calling until you get an answer on when the hearing will take place. For each citizen it may cost four minutes. But the benefit to this country, and the number of issues that we are going to shed light on, is way worth it. And if it was not, they would not have gone this far to gag it. I have been fighting very hard, but you need to pay attention to the fact they have been fighting very hard, too.

This is unprecedented. If I am the most gagged woman in the history of this country, and if they have gone as far as invoking the States Secrets Privilege, the issue is important enough. So for anyone who may say, well, how do I know this case is credible? I’ll tell you that there is a report, there are statements from bipartisan senators, Senator Grassley, Senator Leahy, Congressman Waxman. And these are all on the record statements establishing the credibility of the case. The credibility has been established. The importance of this case has been established. Our government has taken unprecedented steps to silence and coverup this case. That should tell the American public how important this case is.

Call Chairman Waxman and write to him and do not stop until we have this hearing in place, and we have the agents testifying. I’m going to emphasize two things here: a) that they testify on oath, and b) that the hearings be public. I have had some hearings, and they have been behind closed doors in the Congress. I have briefed them. They already have this information, that's the point I'm trying to make here. They have the information. I have given this information to Chairman Waxman, to Senator Grassley, to Senator Leahy. It’s the American public’s turn to hear about this.

It’s possible that in light of the Chairman’s decision to hold a hearing, the government comes in and says it has to be in closed session and not in public because these are classified issues. But they’re not. If that happens, we won’t get anywhere because then it’s futile. I would not even be willing to testify because I have already done so. Five years ago I gave them testimony behind closed doors. So did other witnesses. It’s time to have open, public hearings and have people under oath. I will testify under oath, and the consequences of lying are severe.

So let’s make this happen, and let’s say that when all channels we rely upon — be it the courts and the Congress and the executive branch and the mainstream media — fail us, we still should move forward and not stop, and reach out to the American public, and make it happen. I hope we can do it, because not being able to do it sends a very bad, awful message to our children and our grandchildren, to say that active citizenry is dead in this country, and that either nothing comes out of it, or people don't care and don't do it.

We take pride in being Americans, and lovers and supporters of freedom - let's show that we can do it despite the fact that we don't have these four channels.

There is Chairman Waxman, an honourable individual, an established case, now we just need the public to say "Let's do it"

~~Call~~ Embarrass Waxman. Demand public open hearings:
DC phone: (202) 225-3976
LA phone: 323 651-1040
Capitol switchboard phone: 800-828-0498

(let me know if you want to be added to my email list for new Sibel-related post. Subject: 'Sibel email list.')

(see also Phil Giraldi's "Waxman’s Witness Protection Program")

Sibel Edmonds: Governments lie outrageously behind closed doors

2007-08-14T21:38:00.001+10:00

If you have been following my posts these last couple of weeks you will notice some overlap in this youtube video - but today I wanted to focus on the fact that Sibel and her lawyers were literally thrown out of court in the midst of her own court case.

For some background, in the intro/setup, Sibel says:

"I had taken the oath to protect my new country, against all enemies, and this was my chance to serve my country. I assumed the enemy was foreign...

Within a few months, I came across some serious issues. Wrongdoing. Some of those would be considered criminal, within the FBI. Some of those involved security breaches, 911 related cover-ups, and sabotaged intelligence operations. In one case, due to the pressure of the State Dept and Pentagon, the FBI was prevented from criminally investigating certain US officials who were engaged in actions against our national security, having loyalties to other governments."

In this snippet of the video, Sibel also describes how her Date of Birth is classified under States Secrets Privilege, as is her country of birth. The fact that she was fired from the FBI is consider a State Secret. All in the name of protecting us from Teh Terrorists.

In the video, Sibel also describes how her ACLU attorney described in court that Sibel's case has been confirmed by the FBI, and by the Depart of Justice, confirmed by witnesses and documents.

Regarding getting kicked out of court, Sibel says

"We don't know what (the govt) told the judges... As far as we know they could give the most outrageous lies. There was no-one there to challenge them, so they could (lie) and we assume they did!"

Given all that, how much faith do you have in the behind-closed-doors-hearings in the Kontogiannis hearing from yesterday? (For those of you who aren't familiar with the case, see emptywheel, Laura Rozen, Mark Levey, Josh Marshall.)

For some perspective, the SDUT reported:
"It's almost Orwellian double-speak,” said Gregg Leslie, the legal defense director for The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. “They say, 'We need secrecy, but the reason we need secrecy is also secret, so we can't tell you.' "

Yeah, it's almost Orwellian double-speak.

The fact that they kicked everyone out of the court isn't the only similarity with Sibel's case - as emptywheel noted:

"Now, the problem here, for District Court Larry Burns is that the government didn't say the contents of those hearings were classified until recently. Which is why we're at the Appeals Court in the first place."

As I noted last week:

"In a recent speech, Sibel again emphasized that the reason that she has been gagged is not for reasons of national security, but rather to cover-up criminality, treason, by high level US officials.

As evidence for this claim, Sibel explained that for the three months prior to Ashcroft blanket-gagging her case, the FBI was conducting unclassified briefings for Congress on the case.

In other words, from the beginning, neither Congress, nor the FBI, even considered that this information might be classified, let alone a 'national security' issue."

Kossack jennyjem in a comment to a recent diary of mine summed it up well:

"Let me get this straight

The FBI isn't denying the wrong doing, but they aren't doing anything about it. Congress agrees laws were violated, but they can't talk about it. The courts won't hear the case in the name of 'national security,' although it is evident that the cover-up has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with covering-up criminal activity. Am I really understanding this?

Where is justice? Where are the checks and balances for this outlaw administration? Who upholds the law in America? I would laugh if I didn't feel like vomiting.

You can bet your boots Henry's getting a call from me. This is a national disgrace."

That's about right. If you agree, Let Sibel Edmonds Speak
~~Call~~ Embarrass Waxman. Demand public open hearings:
DC phone: (202) 225-3976
LA phone: 323 651-1040
Capitol switchboard phone: 800-828-0498

(let me know if you want to be added to my email list for new Sibel-related post. Subject: 'Sibel email list.' (If you think you should already be on the list but haven't heard from me, please try again. googlemail ate some of my homework))

How many others?

2007-08-14T21:36:00.002+10:00

Here is the video of Sibel saying that her case was considered unclassified by congress & FBI until Ashcroft slapped the gag order on everything to do with her case. The video also includes Sibel saying that there are four congresspeople that are being bribed by the Turkish interests, and her Special Agent pointing out that if Sibel knows of four, just from the Turkish desk, how many others must there be?

FBI, Congress: Sibel Edmonds case 'unclassified'

2007-08-14T21:36:00.001+10:00

Former FBI translator and whistleblower Sibel Edmonds is the most gagged woman in US history. Attorney General John Ashcroft twice invoked the rarely used States Secrets Privilege in her case under the guise of classified secrets and protecting national security.

In a recent speech, Sibel again emphasized that the reason that she has been gagged is not for reasons of national security, but rather to cover-up criminality, treason, by high level US officials.

As evidence for this claim, Sibel explained that for the three months prior to Ashcroft blanket-gagging her case, the FBI was conducting unclassified briefings for Congress on the case.

In other words, from the beginning, neither Congress, nor the FBI, even considered that this information might be classified, let alone a 'national security' issue.

As Michael Ostrolenk, National Director of the Liberty Coalition, said: "The excuse of protecting national security is fallacious."

(grfx love to One Pissed Off Liberal )

****

During the Q&A session after the speech, Sibel was asked where we should draw the line between disclosure and national security. Sibel responded thusly (mp3 - 3 mins)"

I can tell you, just from my case (and from other whistleblower cases that I've represented) it almost doesn't deal with any classified information at all. That's why they went and retroactively classified the information.

Even with Congress, one important thing that I have tried to emphasize - and unfortunately the mainstream media is not there really as far as these real issues are concerned... When I went to Congress, I didn't know which Congressmen, Congresswomen, Senators to go to! Because part of my case dealt with our representatives, (and this was based on some counter-intelligence operations) were getting cash bribery from foreign governments. And when I internally started reporting this, and it was not getting anywhere, this great agent that I worked with... said:

"Well, let's say you go to Congress. How are you going to determine who is clean to go to?"

And to me that was really sobering, because he told me:

Just based on Turkish counter-intelligence operations, you know of FOUR corrupt congressional people. Take a look at this room (of translators), we have the Chinese Department, we have, you know, the Arabic, including Saudi Arabia and everything. How many (other corrupt Congressfolk) do you think they have come across?

[snip]
When the two Senators, Senator Leahy and Senator Grassley, one Democrat and one Republican, they heard this information, the FBI discussed the entire case with them during an unclassified meeting - meaning the staff members present during that meeting, none - or most - of them didn't have clearances. So the FBI had decided in the beginning that this was not classified. What happened later? 3 months later? when the Attorney General says 'Oops, this is really going to hurt us' - meaning those who were guilty - 'so we're going to decide to classify it'

I'm a bit of a dunce, and I'd never fully appreciated this. Sibel has repeatedly mentioned that she often had to suggest that certain hearings be held inside SCIFs (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities) but I had presumed that was simply because the Senate Judiciary Committee staffers didn't really know what they were doing. But here we have the FBI - presumably Counter-Intelligence agents who likely know a thing or two about classification, secrecy and national security - confirming Sibel's allegations in unclassified sessions with Congress.

As I said, I'm a dunce. The ACLU timeline on Sibel's case reads:

"JUNE 2002: Senators Grassley and Leahy write the Justice Department Inspector General a letter asking specific questions about Edmonds' allegations and write that the FBI has confirmed many of her allegations in unclassified briefings. This letter is later retroactively classified in May 2004."

You'd think that I'd have understood this already. That's the beauty of the Sibel Edmonds case - there's always something 'new' to learn. And this week I learnt that even the FBI didn't think that the information in Sibel's case deserved to be classified, even as a precaution.

(The 75 min video of Sibel's recent ALA speech is available here (500meg) )

Let Sibel Edmonds Speak
Call Waxman. Demand public open hearings:
DC phone: (202) 225-3976
LA phone: 323 651-1040
Capitol switchboard phone: 800-828-0498

Sibel Edmonds: I assumed the enemy was foreign

2007-08-14T21:29:00.000+10:00

I've put together a quick 5 minute highlight reel of a recent speech by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds from the American Library Association conference

The intro is:

"I had taken the oath to protect my new country, against all enemies, and this was my chance to serve my country. I assumed the enemy was foreign...

Within a few months, i came across some serious issues. Wrongdoing. Some of those would be considered criminal, within the FBI. Some of those involved security breaches, 911 related cover-ups, and sabotaged intelligence operations. In one case, due to the pressure of the State Dept and Pentagon, the FBI was prevented from criminally investigating certain US officials who were engaged in actions against our national security, having loyalties to other governments."

The video isn't supposed to be representative of Sibel's entire speech (which you can see here) but rather I've just captured a few snippets about the efforts that Sibel has gone to in the past 6 years to get some accountability.

The FBI repeatedly investigated Sibel's claims (Office of Inspector General (OIG), Office of Special Counsel (OSC), Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR)) and found them to be valid ("Confirmed all, denied none") therefore the Executive Branch simply gagged her.

Sibel then went to Congress which also investigated her case. They found all her claims to be valid, supported by FBI agents and documents, therefore the Executive Branch gagged Congress.

The senators who had investigated, and confirmed, Sibel's case were outraged, and then complied with the gag order.

Sibel then went to the courts. Sibel and her attorneys were kicked out of court so the government could argue it's case in secrecy - where they were free to tell the most outrageous of lies if they so chose. Sibel and her legal team presume that is exactly what happened. The judge said:

"I know this is draconian, but who am I to argue with the government on matters related to national security?"

But as I wrote last week:

"In a recent speech, Sibel again emphasized that the reason that she has been gagged is not for reasons of national security, but rather to cover-up criminality, treason, by high level US officials.

As evidence for this claim, Sibel explained that for the three months prior to Ashcroft blanket-gagging her case, the FBI was conducting unclassified briefings for Congress on the case.

In other words, from the beginning, neither Congress, nor the FBI, even considered that this information might be classified, let alone a 'national security' issue."

It's now August, 2007, folks. Sibel was the canary in the coalmine. 70% of the population now, finally, understand that the Justice Department is corrupt from top to bottom, thanks to Alberto Gonzales' latest shenanigans. 70% now understand that 'national security' is a fraud. 70% now realize, thanks to Pat Tillman and other cases, that 'Executive Privilege' means 'This stuff is too embarrassing.' 70% will soon realize that there is little difference between 'Executive Privilege' and 'State Secrets Privilege.' Sibel has been saying for years that her case has been gagged to cover up criminal wrong-doing and that it has nothing to do with national security. In fact, in an alternate universe, if her story was to break for the first time today, it'd probably be front-page news all across the country, for weeks. For years, there have been many reasons to think that Sibel is crazy - but now only the 28%ers think that those reasons are legitimate.

Watch the video - and tell me which elements don't comport with everything that we now know to be true.

(Here is the same video, without the annoying music.)

Let Sibel Edmonds Speak
~~Call~~ Embarrass Waxman. Demand public open hearings:
DC phone: (202) 225-3976
LA phone: 323 651-1040
Capitol switchboard phone: 800-828-0498
(let me know if you want to be added to my email list which announces whenever I have a new Sibel-related post. Subject: 'Sibel email list')

Sensational story of Sibel Edmonds

2007-08-14T21:24:00.000+10:00

Over at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak

WaPo: "Sensational story of Sibel Edmonds" almost uniformly ignored by U.S. press.

free speech

2007-07-29T21:16:00.001+10:00

Sibel gave a speech to the American Library Association recently - the whole thing can be see here (500 meg)- I'll be doing a highlight reel - with comment - as soon as I can master the art of video-editing.

The Silence of Henry Waxman

2007-06-16T11:37:00.000+10:00

Fellow Sibelologist, Mike Mejia has written a great piece about Henry Waxman's silence regarding Sibel's case. You can see it here.

Everybody Knows

2007-06-16T11:16:00.000+10:00

I put this video together, to Leonard Cohen's "Everybody Knows".

Who wants to gag Sibel Edmonds? And why?

2007-05-10T09:58:00.000+10:00

I have a new post over at my main blog "Who wants to gag Sibel Edmonds? And why?"

Sibel Edmonds movie Panel discussion: James Bamford, Robert Parry, film directors (plus Waxman news)

2007-04-23T22:11:00.000+10:00

While we wait for word from Henry Waxman's office about whether he will hold the hearings that he has promised into FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds' case, I've got some footage of the panel discussion that was conducted after the US premiere screening in February. Panel members include James Bamford and Robert Parry, with an introduction by Sibel. Footage and some selected quotes downstairs.

I always try to look for new ways of recruiting people to the Sibel cause. One line from the panel that got a hearty applause was when director Mathieu Verboud said that the people who tried to recruit Sibel to spy for them at the FBI (ed: essentially Richard Perle and Douglas Feith) "are the (same) people who set up the war effort in Iraq - by falsifying intelligence information to make this country go to war." In other words, if you are against the Iraq war, then you might consider lending your support to Sibel so that we can punish the people involved.

(I've also got a brief update regarding the proposed hearings downstairs.)

On February 3, Kill The Messenger, a documentary about FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds' case, was shown in DC - followed by a panel discussing "the current state of the U.S. Main media, unconstitutional government secrecy, and national security whistleblowers."

Panel members were James Bamford, Robert Parry, Mathieu Verboud, Ben Wizner (ACLU), Stephen Kohn, (Chairman, National Whistleblower Center), Kristina Borjesson (journalist). All bios available here.

I finally have video footage of the event - presented here in two clips. Firstly, a nine minute introduction by Sibel and the directors, and a 9 minute video of selected snips from the panel. I've included some of the quotes below in text form (all errors are mine)

Introductory clip:

Selected quotes:

Sibel Edmonds:

I'm a US citizen, I did not commit any crime, and they issued all these gag orders and they said I don't have my First Amendment right, I don't have my Fourth Amendment right, Fifth Amendment right. They had the Federal court here in DC going along with it... I went to Congress, they didn't do anything. I went to the Mainstream Media, they couldn't care less, really. Sure, it was a 'sensational' story - a whistleblower was fired and gagged, but nobody within the Mainstream Media ever asked 'Why the State Secrets Privilege? You know, she was a language specialist, it's not as if she was an undercover agent, or an informant... Why would they go to such an length to gag her?'

Not a single person within the US Mainstream Media ever asked this question. They didn't want to know. It was all about the firing aspect of it - and even that died down. So, we have a fantastic panel here to talk about that aspect of it...

Jean Viallet (Co-director) :

One brief thing, to tell you the truth - because this film is about the truth - Why did French people do this film? Because nobody in America did it.' (applause)

Mathieu Verboud (Co-director):

The lesson that we draw from Sibel Edmonds' story is that Washington power is for sale, and has been for sale for a long time. The people in positions of power in this country really sell their influence, to the highest bidder.

In this respect, it's no surprise that foreign agents were able to sneak into this country and do the dirty operations that they did. These people are living proof to the notion of conflict of interest - because these people work for governments, but they are also highly connected to the military-industrial-conflict, they draft, and implement, national security policies, and at the same time they work for foreign governments, as agents of influence for foreign governments.

And Sibel, those who I consider to be your enemies in this case are people who have been opposing for years and years, all arms-reduction treaties - be it bacteriological, chemical, nuclear, conventional - for years. Douglas Feith is the only guy, as I understand, in the annals of foreign policy in the US who, on a personal basis, always opposes any kind of arms reduction. You know, this guy should work for the Iranian government, but no, he works for the US government.

These people, as we have said in the film, have been passing secret information to Israel for the last 30 years. These people have been on the Turkish payroll. And the very people who wanted to sign Sibel are the people who set up the war effort in Iraq - by falsifying intelligence information to make this country go to war. (applause)

Panel Clip

Selected quotes:

Mathieu Verboud (Co-director):

In Sibel's case, and in many other cases, we know the crime, we know the rational for the crime. Qui bono? We can also answer this question. We know the bad guys, and yet, the rest of the story is... nothing.

Robert Parry:

It's a great documentary, it's the kind of thing we should see a lot more of, and it shouldn't always have to be done by people outside of the United States.

Stephen Kohn (Attorney):

Sibel is the perfect example - they tried every single trick in the book to silence her - and yes they defeated her legal claims, but that's a minimum defeat. Is Sibel Edmonds silenced?

Robert Parry:

In the 1980s we saw this idea that became more and more popular, and it was really brought to us by the people we now call the neoconservatives, and it was called 'Perception Management.' They understood that if they could control how the American public perceived events around the world, they could control the American people, and all the power and money that goes through that.

James Bamford:

A lot of the things that have come out, and they didn't come out until Sibel started looking into this, but that's where a lot of the secrets are being hidden behind the State Secrets Privilege, are those enormous cooperative agreements between not only countries, but individuals and groups - between the American Turkish Council, AIPAC, groups like that. And those things are the hardest things of all to come out in this country - because you can't get anyone at all in the Mainstream Media, or even to some degree, the alternative media - to write about that - and those things are really the most important things to come out...

James Bamford:

We had Jimmy Carter come out with his book, and the Mearsheimer & Walt report come out, so there is an opening up of the questioning of our relationship, and also the questioning of how much money is going in, and how much pressure is coming out from AIPAC, and all those groups.

Robert Parry:

We've now reached a point in the US where we don't even report stories about how the very fundamental ideas of our country have been altered. What happened after 911, and the beginning of the War On Terror is that we've ultimately had a change in the whole framework of our government - we do not have inalienable rights any more.

Robert Parry:

If we wanted to honest, we'd go into the 5th grade classes and civics classes around the country and we'd take out the civics books and throw them away - because that doesn't exist any more. (applause)

---------------------

Other film news:
If you haven't seen the trailer for the film yet, you can watch it here. I've also got a stirring one minute speech by Sibel from the film here.

And no, I still haven't heard any word about when the film will be available in the US. I promise you'll be the first to know - you can check in at my blog regarding the film here.

The film was recently shown here in Australia and was well received (I was chatting about the film over dinner in a restaurant the night after it was shown, and people sitting at neighboring tables had seen it and wanted to join in the conversation.)

The film was recently shown at the Chicago International Documentary Film Festival. It was described thusly:
"Possibly the festival's most radioactive entry, this 2006 documentary for French TV centers on FBI whistle-blower Sibel Edmonds, who was fired from the bureau's translation unit in March 2002 and subsequently claimed she'd seen evidence of money laundering, narcotics trafficking, and participation in the nuclear black market. "
Radioactive is right. Particularly in Chicago, home of Dennis Hastert.

The reviews from the French press are here.

Sibel's credibility:
I still read comments around the place, including here, doubting Sibel's credibility for some reason. My co-blogger Miguel recently wrote "The Incredibly, Credible Sibel" which outlined "3 solid sources that give important credence to Sibel's story." We also have some new data points.

James 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."

Phil Giraldi:

Edmonds is no crackpot and is considered to be a credible witness, most of whose charges were substantiated both by former FBI officials in 2002 and by the Department of Justice in 2005.

John Cole (Veteran FBI agent, counterintelligence/counter-terrorism in DC, later head of Counter-Intelligence for Pakistan & Afghanistan) in Kill The Messenger:

I wanted to meet her cos I wanted to help her. I felt that maybe I could be of some assistance to her because I knew she was doing the right thing. I knew she was right. But I wanted to hear her side of the story.

I was talking to FBI colleagues in the administrative division who had read her file, who had read the investigative report and they were telling me a different story. They were telling me that Sibel Edmonds was a 100% accurate, that management knew that she was correct.

Cole was actually working on a case related to Sibel's - and he too has reported the details of the case to both the Dept of Justice's Inspector General and Congress.

Waxman hearings:
We still haven't heard anything from Waxman. It is very frustrating. Since we launched the campaign in early March, Waxman and his office has stopped returning calls to people from many people/organizations (ACLU, POGO, GAP, Open the Government, Liberty Coalition) who are used to getting their calls to his office returned immediately. Phil Giraldi recently outlined his take on Waxman's apparent reluctance here.

We don't know why Waxman has gone silent all of a sudden - but we have decided to give him until the end of this week to give us an answer. If we don't hear anything from him by then, then we'll be asking you to get on the phones to his office again. We'll launch that new campaign in conjunction with a few other goodies that we have up our sleeve that we'll be announcing next week.

Stay tuned.

Thanks again for your support. Please let me know if you want me to email you when I have new Sibel-related information/posts. At a minimum, it helps the information get on the 'recommended' list here which means that more people become aware of Sibel's case.

Are the American people aware of Sibel?

2007-04-21T17:06:00.000+10:00

A response by a viewer of KTM:

A Serious Allegation!
This is not a conspiracy theory; it’s a question regarding an allegation.

I recently watched a documentary, on one of our Special Broadcasting TV Channels (SBS), titled “Kill the Messenger”. It was concerning allegations made by the former FBI Translator and “Whistleblower” Sibel Edmonds about corruption in the US Government Executive Branch and Congress.
The documentary was quite detailed and spoke of Turkish bribery of high level US officials; allegations of Money Laundering, Drug Dealing and the trading of nuclear devices contrary to the non proliferation treaty.

I found the allegations extraordinary, more so by the fact they were made almost five years ago. Are the American people aware of this claim and why does the Congress not investigate these serious assertions?

'Why?' indeed.

FBI management: Sibel Edmonds is 100% accurate.

2007-04-19T20:57:00.000+10:00

* btw - Giraldi may have given us the best shorthand reference for future 'is sibel credible?' questions:

"FBI whistle blower Sibel Edmonds and her numerous supporters both inside and outside of government... Edmonds is no crackpot and is considered to be a credible witness, most of whose charges were substantiated both by former FBI officials in 2002 and by the Department of Justice in 2005."

meanwhile, here's the transcript from KTM from veteran FBI counterintelligence agent John Cole:

I wanted to meet her cos I wanted to help her. I felt that maybe I could be of some assistance to her because I knew she was doing the right thing. I knew she was right. But I wanted to hear her side of the story.

I was talking to FBI colleagues in the administrative division who had read her file, who had read the investigative report and they were telling me a different story. They were telling me that Sibel Edmonds was a 100% accurate, that management knew that she was correct.

They were wondering what FBI management was going to do in regards to the Sibel Edmonds case.

2007-04-19T17:15:00.000+10:00

Phil Giraldi has a new article out about Waxman's apparent reluctance to hold hearings into Sibel's case.

KTM 'Most Radioactive Entry' at Chicago International Documentary Film Festival

2007-04-10T09:33:00.000+10:00

http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/stories/sidebars/movies/DOCUMENTARY/

"Possibly the festival's most radioactive entry, this 2006 documentary for French TV centers on FBI whistle-blower Sibel Edmonds, who was fired from the bureau's translation unit in March 2002 and subsequently claimed she'd seen evidence of money laundering, narcotics trafficking, and participation in the nuclear black market. "

KTM Screening at Chicago International Documentary Festival

2007-04-05T01:23:00.000+10:00

http://www.chicagodocfestival.org/07_kill%20the%20messenger.htm

A screening took place on Monday, April 2nd. The second screening will take place on Saturday, April 7 at 9:00 p.m. in the Chopin Theater.

2007-03-28T06:23:00.000+10:00

(I'm not going to be able to post for a couple of weeks. My buddy Miguel will publish any relevant information here)

KTM: 'best investigative story' award.

2007-03-28T05:54:00.000+10:00

This from an email I received:

"Thank you for a marvellous blog.

Let me remind you that last Saturday, March 24, KTM was awarded a well deserved
prize at the Figra ("Festival international grand reportage d´actualité") as best investigative story. Festival is held at Le Touquet in northern France."

Congratulations Mathieu & Jean.

australia broadcast

2007-03-27T22:06:00.000+10:00

KTM showed in Australia tonight - it was heavily promoted all week by SBS.

i'll be available this week for interviews - sibel isn't available - but if she was contactable, she'd suggest that media email me

the reviews from the french screening lat last year are here

For my summary of Sibel's case (which is much broader than what we saw in the documentary) see "What the heck is Sibel Edmonds' Case about? And why should I care?"

For more background, see the recent interview I did with Scott Horton on Sibel's case, and also the joint interview that Sibel & I did with Peter B Collins last week.

KTM in Oz

2007-03-21T12:02:00.000+11:00

Kill The Messenger to be shown here in Australia next Tuesday on SBS.

CUTTING EDGE - KILL THE MESSENGER
This documentary reveals how a foreign spy ring with links to Al-Qaeda has been discovered working within the FBI. Sibel Edmonds began work at the FBI translating wire taps in an investigation into a foreign spy ring operating in the US. She became suspicious of her colleagues after discovering some mistranslations and was then invited to join the spy ring which had evidently infiltrated the FBI itself. She went straight to her bosses and rather than being hailed as a hero she was promptly sacked. After going public on 60 Minutes she has been officially gagged. (From France, in English and French with English subtitles) (Documentary)

This is the 60 Minute version, in French/English.

2007-03-15T23:02:00.000+11:00

I have a new post at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak called "What the heck is Sibel Edmonds' Case about?"

everything you wanted to know but were afraid to ask.

2007-03-15T10:34:00.001+11:00

* i've posted a primer by Bill Weaver on the State Secrets Privilege and it's abuse in Sibel's case at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak.

DEEP STATE SECRETS PRIVILEGE

2007-03-11T15:14:00.000+11:00

A typically terrific post by Mizgin:

DEEP STATE SECRETS PRIVILEGE

"On Tuesday, July 6, 2004, Judge Reggie Walton made a decision and ruled on my case. Under his ruling, I, an American citizen, am not entitled to pursue my 1st and 5th Amendment rights guaranteed under the Constitution of the United States. The vague reasoning cited, without any explanation, is to protect 'certain diplomatic relations for national security.'"
~ Sibel Edmonds.

Earlier this week, Sibel Edmonds' organization, the National Security Whistleblower's Coalition, issued a press release describing another FBI agent's corroboration of Edmonds' own claims "of illegal activities by Turkish organizations and their agents in the United States, and the involvement of certain elected and appointed U.S. officials in the Department of State, Pentagon, and the U.S. Congress in these activities."

If you are a Kurd from Turkey, you won't need more corroboration of Ms. Edmonds allegations; history alone will testify to the veracity of her story, and by "history" I mean Susurluk.
[]
Here again, the principal players in the Susurluk Affair were involved; however, it's quite likely that they were not alone, but had American counterparts, as mentioned in the Vanity Fair story about Sibel Edmonds:
In fact, much of what Edmonds reportedly heard seemed to concern not state espionage but criminal activity. There was talk, she told investigators, of laundering the profits of large-scale drug deals and of selling classified military technologies to the highest bidder.
It is here that we pick up the threads of Susurluk that reach deeply into the bureaucratic and lobbyist milieu of Washington DC.

In 2004, in an interview with Christopher Deliso, former FBI translator and whistle-blower Sibel Edmonds spoke of her encounter with Douglas and Melek Can Dickerson and their attempts to recruit her into the American Turkish Council. Douglas Dickerson was US Air Force officer who had been stationed in Turkey sometime between 1991 and 1995, where he met and married MIT agent Melek Can Dickerson. Major Dickerson was in charge of weapons procurement for, among other countries, Turkey.

In 2006 more information surfaced on Dickerson, who "worked in the embassy's military attaché office and was responsible for logistics matters with the Turkish military." Furthermore:
In 1996, the Defense Department's Inspector General's office launched an investigation of a U.S. military officer at the Ankara embassy who was caught receiving a bribe from MIT agents. Shortly after the investigation started, Dickerson was transferred to a U.S. Air Force base in Germany.
[]

Dickerson worked under the direction of American Deep Stater, Marc Grossman, who served as Deputy Chief of Mission in Ankara from 1989 to 1992, and then as ambassador to Turkey from 1994 to 1997. According to the same 2006 report, Grossman became a person of interest "to counter-intelligence agents since his stint as U.S. ambassador in Ankara." Was he also investigated, along with Dickerson for his involvement with MIT? Was he also taking bribes from MIT? For what reason? Why did Grossman resign from the State Department at the beginning of 2005 when he held the third-ranking position in the department after an apparently successful 29-year career? How much Kurdish blood is on Marc Grossman's hands?

Undoubtedly Grossman was involved with the very same weapons transfers that HRW condemned in 1995. The fact that Grossman is now a vice-chairman of The Cohen Group, a lobby firm for the war industry headed by former Clinton-appointed defense secretary, William Cohen, indicates that he is cashing in on old relationships built during his Ankara days.

great work, Mizgin. Read the rest.

Sibel interview with James Bamford, Scott Horton

2007-03-09T06:57:00.000+11:00

Sibel had a great interview with James Bamford and Scott Horton - discussing the petition, the need for hearings, and the news from earlier in the week about the FISA violations.

Audio, transcript.

New Campaign: Let Sibel Edmonds Speak

2007-03-08T10:40:00.000+11:00

We are running a new campaign, calling for open hearings in Sibel's case.

Please call Congressmen Waxman and Conyers

Details at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak.

Two FBI Whistleblowers Confirm Illegal Wiretapping of Government Officials and Misuse of FISA

2007-03-06T07:44:00.000+11:00

we've got some important breaking news on SIbel's case today:

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

desperately seeking sibel

2007-03-05T22:58:00.000+11:00

for those of you desperately awaiting the big Sibel news that will be out mid afternoon monday, here's something to tide you over.

This is some of her acceptance speech for PEN American Center’s 2006 PEN/Newman’s Own First Amendment Award, footage from Kill The Messenger.

2007-03-02T22:14:00.000+11:00

a transcript of my interview with scott horton about the Sibel case is here

60 Minutes

2007-03-02T17:57:00.000+11:00

I've put up a new video at YouTube based on the 60 Minutes piece. Hopefully it satisfies whatever rules YouTube is operating by today.

Charles Grassley says

"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."

Of course, former FBI counterintelligence agent John Cole said the same thing:

"They (internal FBI) were telling me that Sibel Edmonds was a 100 percent accurate, that management knew that she was correct."

In the video, Grassley also says that we need to turn the FBI upside-down so that, you know, it isn't filled with moles and incompetents. He said this in 2002, and Sibel's corrupt boss, Mike Feghali, is now head of all of the Arab desk.

interview

2007-03-01T12:00:00.000+11:00

Scott Horton interviewed me about the Sibel case. 50 mins. The sound quality isn't great - but we covered a lot of the relevant ground.

2007-02-24T16:49:00.000+11:00

YouTube has pulled Ed Bradley's 60 Minutes piece on Sibel "due to terms of use violation."

Does anyone have a copy? I'd like to re-post some snippets from the segment.

UPDATE: I have the piece. thnx.

2007-02-21T16:58:00.000+11:00

We've got a bunch of new stuff that will be coming up in the next few days - including a video of (some of?) the panel from the screening earlier in the month, and a whole bunch of other Sibel-related things.

Please check back in.

The Incredibly, Credible Sibel

2007-02-08T00:19:00.000+11:00

One of the battles Sibel is forced to fight- even with many progressives and liberals- is to constantly reestablish her credibility. In some sense, this has been inevitable, given the shocking allegations she has made. (In case you haven't been paying attention, Sibel translated wiretaps that reveal Turkish nationals involved in drug running, terror-support activities, illegal lobbying, arms trafficking and corruption of high-level U.S. officials.) And yet, as sensational and astounding as her revelations sound, it is hard to deny that Sibel has a lot of corroboration for her story – even FBI officials have had to admit privately to Congress and the Inspector General that her claims are backed up by other documents and witnesses.

There exist 3 solid sources that give important credence to Sibel's story. They are as follows:

Members of Congress- Senators Patrick Leahy, Charles Grassley and Representative Henry Waxman are all on record as saying Sibel's story is corroborated within the FBI. Grassley is the most interesting case. A conservative Republican, he allowed himself to be filmed on camera in 2002 very emphatically saying

"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." Grassley by then had certainly heard the allegations Sibel made against his GOP colleague Dennis Hastert. It blows the mind to think Grassley would have given any backing to Sibel's story at all if there was any way he could have discounted it. It further more stretches one's imagination to think that Grassley would allow himself to be quoted as supporting a whistleblower unless he firmly believed the allegations to be corroborated.\n Grassley, whatever you think of his conservative views, is a good politician. And good politicians are generally very cautious in their public statements.

The Inspector General's Report- At the behest of Senators Grassley and Leahy of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Department of Justice's Inspector General (IG) did its own investigation into Sibel's allegations.\n While the initial Report was completely classified, the IG was forced to put out a declassified version which said the following: "we believe that many of her allegations were supported, that the FBI did not take them seriously enough, and that her allegations were, in fact, the most significant factor in the FBI's decision to terminate her services."

Former Attorney General Ashcroft - The actions of the U.S. government toward Sibel, especially former Attorney General Ashcroft in 2002-2004, should tell us a whole lot as well.
First, Ashcroft invoked the "state secrets privilege" to block Sibel's wrongful termination lawsuit. Then, he invoked it again to prevent Sibel from repeating her previous public statements in the 9-11 families' Motley-Rice lawsuit. Finally, Ashcroft effectively gagged the U.S. Congress in 2004 by retroactively classifying public information already released from previously unclassified Senate hearings.

Now maybe it's just me who thinks this way, but if Sibel Edmonds is going around spinning conspiracy theories, why would the U.S. government need to gag her so severely? The answer: it wouldn't. Finally, it should be added that Sibel has a lineup of respected persons and organizations that have publicly backed her in one way or another.

These people/organizations include:
Daniel Ellsberg, Pentagon Papers whistleblower
Senator Frank Lautenberg
Representative Carolyn Maloney
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)
Former CIA Counterterrorism Expert Phillip Giraldi
Former CIA Analyst, Ray McGovern
Former CIA Agent Larry Johnson
Former FBI Counterintelligence Agent John Cole
NSA Whistleblower Russ Tice
National Coalition against Censorship
Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC)
Liberty Coalition
National Whistleblower Center
Open the Government .Org
U.S.-Armenian Public Affairs Committee (USAPAC)
Citizen Outreach
Concerned Foreign Service Officers
Fairfax County Privacy Council
Federal Hispanic Law Enforcement Officers Association
Government Accountability Project (GAP)
National Air Disaster Alliance/Foundation

So next time you feel the urge to dismiss Sibel's claims, keep all these facts in mind. And especially try to remember what former FBI counterintelligence agent John Cole's said his FBI sources told him about Sibel.

"They were telling me that Sibel Edmonds was a 100 percent accurate, that management knew that she was correct."

That, my friends, says it all.

more screenings

2007-02-02T11:19:00.000+11:00

* Busboys and Poets in DC will be screening the movie for the public on Sunday at 1pm - and will probably run some more screenings in the near future. The phones are running off the hook with requests.

From their website, the focus of the panel on Saturday:

"FOCUS: If the rest of the world seems to deem the issues presented in the this film worthy of prime-time attention, why does the United States main media continue to shy from its coverage? The film presents a terrifying picture of Turkish networks' activities in global nuclear black-market, narcotics and illegal arms trafficking activities in the United States, and examines the extraordinary efforts of officials within the US Government to insure that the secrecy surrounding Edmonds' case be maintained at any cost from Edmonds' termination from the FBI, to invoking the State Secrets Privilege, to gagging the US Congress. "

why indeed?

ktm screening in DC

2007-01-31T05:35:00.000+11:00

On Saturday Feb 3, there will be a private screening of the movie about Sibel Edmonds' case, ‘Kill the Messenger,’ in DC at Busboys & Poets. I can't be there, unfortunately. Dammit.

After the movie there will be a moderated panel discussion covering the following topics: the current state of the U.S. Main media, unconstitutional government secrecy, and national security whistleblowers.

From the invitation:
_____________________________________________
The panel will include experts on media, secrecy and whistleblowers; below is a list of confirmed panel members:

Mathieu Verboud, Film Director, Kill the Messenger- In 2005, Mathieu Verboud and Jean Robert Viallet co-directed “The Lost Children of Tranquility Bay,” an investigative documentary on ultra violent boot camps for troubled teens in the U.S. “Kill The Messenger,” “Une Femme a abattre,” is the second film co-directed by Verboud and Viallet. This exclusive investigative piece tells the story of Sibel Edmonds, an ex-FBI employee fighting to expose a major espionage case, and its subsequent cover-up by the US government.

James Bamford, Author, Investigative Journalist - Mr. Bamford is a bestselling author and one of the country's leading writers on intelligence and national security issues. His books include The Puzzle Palace and Body of Secrets, the only two books on the ultrasecret National Security Agency, and most recently A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq and the Abuse of America's Intelligence Agencies, which Time called “probably the best one-volume companion to the harrowing events in the war on terrorism since 1996.” Mr. Bamford has also written for many magazines, including investigative cover stories for The New York Times Magazine, The Washington Post Magazine and The Los Angeles Times Magazine, and is a contributing writer for Rolling Stone. He recently won the 2006 National Magazine Award for Reporting, the highest honor in the magazine industry. He also spent a decade as the Washington Investigative Producer for the ABC News program, World News Tonight, and was a distinguished visiting professor at the University of California, Berkeley.

Robert Parry, Investigative Journalist, Consortium News- Mr. Parry is an investigative journalist. During the 1980’s he worked for Associated Press and Newsweek, and broke a number of Iran-Contra stories. He was the first journalist to report on Oliver North’s activities in the White House basement, and the first to describe the Nicaraguan Contras’ involvement with Cocaine traffickers. In 1995, he established Consortium News as an online publication dedicated to investigative journalism. Mr. Parry has written several books, including Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the press and “Project Truth” and Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq.

Ben Wizner, Attorney, ACLU- Ben Wizner has been a staff attorney at the ACLU since 2001. He is counsel in the ACLU's challenge to the rendition to torture of an innocent German citizen (El-Masri v. Tenet), as well as in the ACLU's suits seeking to expose FBI and Pentagon surveillance of domestic groups and individuals. He was part of the legal team representing Sibel Edmonds in her suit challenging her unlawful termination by the FBI. Ben is a graduate of Harvard College and New York University School of Law.

Stephen Kohn, attorney, KK&amp;amp;C; Chairman of the Board, National Whistleblower Center- Mr. Kohn is one of the nation's foremost experts in the area of whistleblower protection. Mr. Kohn wrote the first legal treatise on whistleblowing and has successfully litigated many of the nation's landmark whistleblower cases, including Sibel Edmonds’ case. He is a former Clinical Supervisor at the Antioch School of Law. He has a J.D. from Northeastern University School of Law, an M.A. in Political Science from Brown University, and a B.S. in Social Education from Boston University. Mr. Kohn is the author of numerous books and law review articles on whistleblowing and the rights of political dissidents.

Kristina Borjesson- An award-winning print and broadcast journalist for more than twenty-five years, Kristina Borjesson is a noted media critic and investigative journalist. Her latest book, Feet to the Fire: The Media After 9/11: Top Journalists Speak Out contains a series of candid conversations with leading US journalists, including national security and intelligence reporters, examining mainstream press coverage of the run-up to the Iraq war. Most recently, Borjesson has been producing an investigative documentary for HDNet’s Dan Rather Reports. The program focuses on key individuals in the US government responsible for generating and disseminating the false information used to take the US to war in Iraq.

Background: “Kill the Messenger,” a documentary produced by Zadig Productions, directed by French filmmakers Mathieu Verboud and Jean Robert Viallet, has been featured in prime time on Canal + in France and on Be TV in Belgium, and will also be aired in Australia, on SBS. The documentary explores the abuses behind the State Secrets Privilege as invoked in FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds’ case as well as highlighting the travails and persecution of US national security whistleblowers.

The filmmakers, Verboud and Viallet, spent nearly two years interviewing witnesses and researching the invocation and implementation of the state secrets privilege in Edmonds’ case. Based on their documented findings and interviews with experts such as David Albright, Philip Giraldi, John Cole, Joseph Trento, Glenn Fine, and others familiar with Edmonds’ case, the film presents a terrifying picture of Turkish networks’ activities in global nuclear black-market, narcotics and illegal arms trafficking activities in the United States, and examines the extraordinary efforts of officials within the US Government to insure that the secrecy surrounding Edmonds’ case be maintained at any cost – from Edmonds’ termination from the FBI, to invoking the State Secrets Privilege, to gagging the US Congress.

The filmmakers, Verboud and Viallet, spent nearly two years interviewing witnesses and researching the invocation and implementation of the state secrets privilege in Edmonds’ case. Based on their documented findings and interviews with experts such as David Albright, Philip Giraldi, John Cole, Joseph Trento, Glenn Fine, and others familiar with Edmonds’ case, the film presents a terrifying picture of Turkish networks’ activities in global nuclear black-market, narcotics and illegal arms trafficking activities in the United States, and examines the extraordinary efforts of officials within the US Government to insure that the secrecy surrounding Edmonds’ case be maintained at any cost – from Edmonds’ termination from the FBI, to invoking the State Secrets Privilege, to gagging the US Congress.

To view the trailer, an exclusive interview with the directors, background information, and more Click Here

_____________________________________________

The panel will be recorded, and I'll post the video here when it becomes available.

I understand that there will be a number of journalists at the screening - with any luck, we will soon see some more articles written about Sibel's case. About time, don't you think?

In case you missed it, Jeff Stein wrote an article in Congressional Quarterly quoting the movie on Monday:

“I thought that I could be of some assistance to her,” (John M. Cole, a veteran FBI counterintelligence agent) says in “Kill the Messenger,” a new documentary film about her case, “because I knew she 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, who had only perfunctorily investigated her allegations.

“They were telling me that Sibel Edmonds was a 100 percent accurate, that management knew that she was correct.”

But they buried it.

In 2004, after months of harassment by superiors for his defense of Edmonds, Cole resigned.

John Cole was actually working on a related case to Sibel's - and he too has reported the details of the case to both the Dept of Justice's Inspector General and Congress.

From the Vanity Fair article about Sibel:

"Now 44, (John Cole) joined the F.B.I. in 1985. By the late 1990’s, he was running undercover operations in the Washington area, focusing on counter-terrorism and counter-intelligence. Later, while playing a key role in the 9/11 investigation, he became the F.B.I.’s national counter-intelligence program manager for India, Afghanistan and Pakistan. "

Did you catch that? The FBI drove their key counter-intelligence manager for Pakistan and Afghanistan (and 911) out of his job because he defended the "100% accurate" Sibel. Read that again, and then line up to see the movie when it gets released in the US.

In the meantime, we'll have some action items for you in the coming weeks to help support Sibel. We have some good news on the way. Stay tuned.

Oh - and you can see the reviews of the movie from France here.

I'm going to be offline for 2 weeks immediately after the screening of the movie, but my buddy Miguel will be posting any media followup at sibeledmonds.blogspot.com

National Security Whistle Blowers: The ‘Undead’?

2007-01-28T07:56:00.000+11:00

* Jeff Stein has a good article in Congressional Quarterly about whistleblowers which quotes Kill the Messenger:

National Security Whistle Blowers: The ‘Undead’?
[]
Sibel Edmonds

Take John M. Cole, a veteran FBI counterintelligence agent whose 18-year career took a nosedive when he came to the rescue of Sibel Edmonds.

Edmonds is the former FBI language specialist who surfaced in June 2002 with a strange tale of how she had been fired by the Bureau after telling supervisors that a foreign intelligence ring had penetrated the translators’ unit where she worked, among other sensitive issues.

Now why would they do that?

You can’t find out much, because then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft invoked a “state secrets privilege” to stop her suit against the FBI for wrongful dismissal.

A gag order prevents her from adding details to another of her sensational charges, that government eavesdroppers had intercepted the Sept. 11 hijackers plans.

Edmonds, born in Iran of Turkish origins, also claims she discovered unsavory links between U.S. defense and intelligence officials, weapons makers, Israel, and Ankara.

“I wanted to meet her because I wanted to help her,” says Cole, who resigned from the FBI after years of writing unanswered reports about lax security and mismanagement of the translations unit, which handles electronic intercepts of foreign spies, among other materials.

“I thought that I could be of some assistance to her,” Cole says in “Kill the Messenger,” a new documentary film about her case, “because I knew she 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, who had only perfunctorily investigated her allegations.

“They were telling me that Sibel Edmonds was a 100 percent accurate, that management knew that she was correct.”

But they buried it.

In 2004, after months of harassment by superiors for his defense of Edmonds, Cole resigned.

A year later, the Justice Department’s Inspector General concluded: “the evidence clearly corroborated Edmonds’ allegations.”

In response, the FBI said it was taking another look at the Edmonds case.

“That investigation is continuing,” it said on Jan. 14, 2005.

In response to a query on Friday afternoon, the FBI produced a 2005 press release on improvements in the translation unit. It was not able to provide further clarification by the end of the day.

Many More

Edmonds, meanwhile, had gone on to create something uniquely Washingtonian: a home for the national security undead.

Launched in 2004, her National Security Whistle Blowers Coalition now has over 60 members, disillusioned former CIA, FBI, National Security Agency, Pentagon, Homeland Security and State Department officials.

People like ex-FBI agents John Vincent and Robert Wright, who saw their careers go south after they blew the whistle on problems in the Bureau’s counterterrorism cases.

And Kevin Cleary, a U.S. Customs investigator whose nearly three decades in law enforcement went off the rails after he “uncovered and reported drug-related public corruption,” including “the compromise of a federal drug interdiction program,” according to his biography on the whistle blower Web site.

There’s Shawn Carpenter, the Sandia National Laboratory employee who was fired after telling the FBI that “hundreds of computer networks at major US defense contractors, military installations and government agencies were being systematically compromised, and sensitive information was being stolen by hackers.
Edmonds is not the easiest person to get along with, say some whistleblowers who have resigned from or declined to join her organization.

So a number of important whistle blowers remain outside the organization.”

NSWBC donation drive

2007-01-13T06:15:00.000+11:00

* Sibel's organization, the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, is having a fundraiser. You can donate directly here, or read a little more about why I think you should support them here.

Gravy Train

2007-01-08T05:52:00.000+11:00

I have a new post up at my main blog called "Sibel Edmonds & the Neocons' Turkish Gravy-Train"

Peter Dale Scott & Sibel

2006-12-23T22:35:00.000+11:00

I have a new post up at my other blog about Peter Dale Scott & Sibel. PDS mentioned Sibel in a speech earlier this week.

PDS says:

This is (Daniel) Ellsberg’s summary of what Sibel Edmonds is saying:
Al Qaeda, she’s been saying to Congress, is financed 95% by drug money, drug traffic to which the U.S. government shows a blind eye, has been ignoring because it very heavily involves allies and assets of ours, such as Turkey, Kyrayzstan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan - all of the Stans, in a drug traffic where the opium originates in Afghanistan, is processed in Turkey and delivered to Europe where it furnishes 96% of Europe’s heroin by Albanians, either in Albania or Kosovo, Albanian muslims in Kosovo, basically the KLA Kosovo Liberation Army (which we backed heavily in that episode at the end of the century, that’s last century) ---–"

the rest of the post is here

the theft of nuclear secrets by the cabal

2006-12-09T00:07:00.000+11:00

i have a new post up about Sibel and the theft of nuclear secrets by the cabal

Sibel Edmonds: America's Watergate

2006-12-02T08:05:00.000+11:00

I have a new post - Sibel Edmonds: America's Watergate- at my other blog about Sibel & Susurluk, based on Adrian Gatton's terrific new article.

Sibel Edmonds: America's Watergate

2006-12-01T23:36:00.000+11:00

i have a new post up : "Sibel Edmonds: America's Watergate"

Hijacking of a Nation

2006-11-30T02:32:00.000+11:00

Part two of Sibel's "Hijacking of a Nation" is now up at NSWBC

A must read for any 'sibelologist' - she lays out the core of her case for all to see.

The Foreign Agent Factor

2006-11-18T10:47:00.000+11:00

* Sibel has written a great op-ed "THE HIGHJACKING OF A NATION - Part 1: The Foreign Agent Factor" about the unholy alliance of the Military-Industrial-Complex and the revolving door of lobbyists, congresscritters and 'dime-a-dozen Generals'

Here's the intro:

Today, foreign influence, that most baneful foe of our republican government, has its tentacles entrenched in almost all major decision making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government machine. It does so not secretly, since its self-serving activities are advocated and legitimized by highly positioned parties that reap the benefits that come in the form of financial gain and positions of power.

Foreign governments and foreign-owned private interests have long sought to influence U.S. public policy. Several have accomplished this goal; those who are able and willing to pay what it takes. Those who buy themselves a few strategic middlemen, commonly known as pimps, while in DC circles referred to as foreign registered agents and lobbyists, who facilitate and bring about desired transactions. These successful foreign entities have mastered the art of ‘covering all the bases’ when it comes to buying influence in Washington DC. They have the required recipe down pat: get yourself a few ‘Dime a Dozen Generals,’ bid high in the ‘former statesmen lobby auction’, and put in your pocket one or two ‘ex-congressmen turned lobbyists’ who know the ropes when it comes to pocketing a few dozen who still serve.

The most important facet of this influence to consider is what happens when the active and powerful foreign entities’ objectives are in direct conflict with our nation’s objectives and its interests and security; and when this is the case, who pays the ultimate price and how. There is no need for assumptions of hypothetical situations to answer these questions, since throughout recent history we have repeatedly faced the dire consequences of the highjacking of our foreign and domestic policies by these so-called foreign agents of foreign influence.

Let’s illustrate this with the most important recent case, the catastrophe endured by our people; the September Eleven terrorist attacks. Let’s observe how certain foreign interests, combined with their U.S. agents and benefactors, overrode the interests and security of the entire nation; how thousands of victims and their loved ones were kicked aside to serve the interests of a few; foreign influence and its agents.

Read the rest.

Part two of the op-ed will be published after Thanksgiving.

60 Minutes interview with Ed Bradley & Sibel Edmonds

2006-11-10T15:49:00.001+11:00

I found the 60 Minutes interview with Ed Bradley & Sibel on youtube - as luck would have it the interview was posted just last week.

RIP Ed.

UPDATE: ~~YouTube as pulled the pieces I had linked to.~~ I've published a snippet of the interview at youtube here. Or you can download the whole thing here(275 megs)

UPDATE 2:
Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

----------
update - miguel in the comments:

All,
This is the first time I've seen "60 Minutes: Lost In Translation" since it first aired in October, 2002. Some observations:
1. The overall emphasis in the segment is on Sibel's allegations of deliberate slowdowns and incompetent translators. The issue with Turkish espionage is thrown in near the end almost as an afterthought. We now know that the espionage/bribery was the main reason Sibel blew the whistle to Grassly and Leahy: the incompetence issues were secondary concerns.
2. The segment just starts to touch on the really explosive stuff that Sibel blew the whistle about- the content of the mistranslated documents that revealed what a "Turkish intelligence officer" was up to- at 1:54 of the 3rd segment. At this point, Sibel mentions the Turkish individual is engaged in activities to obtain "the United States military and intelligence secrets"

At this point, the camera cuts away from Sibel is still speaking in mid-sentence. Here's my guess as to what Sibel told Bradley next:
"and to corrupt certain elected officials".

She also may have thrown in something about narcotics.

Hypothesizing that Sibel said something to that effect, imagine how much more explosive that 60 Minutes segment could have been.

By the way, I hear Sibel is very saddened by Bradley's death and had enormous resepect for him. I hypothesize that if Bradley would have had his way, the more explosive allegations would have been kept in the final edit.

i'll have more on this later.

David Rose on Democracy Now, again.

2006-11-08T06:25:00.000+11:00

* our man david rose was on Democracy Now re his Neo-Culpa article - and we got a side dish of Sibel:

AMY GOODMAN: David Rose, you wrote an earlier piece, and we had you on at the time, the question of, did Speaker Hastert accept Turkish bribes to deny Armenian Genocide and approve weapons sales. You wrote a piece for Vanity Fair. Today, Americans are making a decision, basically, about whether Dennis Hastert will run the Congress. They will decide the balance of the House of Representatives, and if Democrats win, he will no longer be Speaker of the House. Any further thoughts on that issue and a summary of the investigation that you did earlier?

DAVID ROSE: Well, that, of course, was an article published last year about the case of Sibel Edmonds, who was a translator who worked for the FBI after 9/11, who listened to wiretap recordings made of a number of individuals, wiretaps of various targets who were working in the Turkish embassy and elsewhere that the FBI thought might be a threat to national security or involved in criminal activity. Now, what the article reported was that one of the investigations that she was asked to work on involved recordings made of individuals who claimed that they had bribed Speaker Hastert, with both covert campaign donations and using other methods to transfer money, in favor for his withdrawing the Armenian Genocide resolution, which at that stage was about to pass through the House. It had passed through two preliminary stages.

Now, I think the extraordinary thing about that story is that it has not ever been contested that there was an FBI investigation, which did pick up allegations made by these Turkish targets, targets who, you know, were judged to be security risks by the FBI making these allegations about Speaker Hastert. I have never claimed that those allegations had substance, that they were true, because I simply cannot say. It's impossible to prove it one way or the other. But it is clear that there were recordings made by the FBI in which individuals claimed to have given illegal payments to the Speaker in return for political favors. And I was always slightly surprised and, indeed, again disappointed that the rest of the American media didn't pick up on that and didn't perhaps try to take it further, because it does seem to me to be an important issue.

We're still working on it, David.

One More Reason to Win – Let Sibel Edmonds Speak

2006-10-29T12:21:00.000+11:00

W. David Jenkins III has just p ublished a good backgrounder article about Sibel and the cabal.

Sibel Edmonds Vindicated?

2006-10-26T00:54:00.000+10:00

i have posted a new article: "Sibel Edmonds Vindicated? FBI Investigation Continues"

KTM interview- #7: When the truth comes out from the CIA

2006-10-24T20:03:00.000+10:00

This is part 7 of my interview with Mathieu Verboud, co-director of the film about Sibel Edmonds, Kill the Messenger. (see Part One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six)

Here we talk about some experts in the film - Phil Giraldi, David Albright and David Rose.

David Albright says that 'Turkey' helped Pakistan build it's nuclear program from the very beginning - and that Al-Qaeda probably already has nuclear material from Pakistan's nuclear program.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

When the truth comes out from the CIA…

Mathieu Verboud: Then, we have the "experts" coming in. Their role in the film is to expose Sibel’s secret…

The first "expert" is David Rose, the British reporter who investigated Sibel's case for Vanity Fair. We also feature Joe Trento, a top journalist in the nuclear black-market and proliferation areas and David Albright, one of the world most prominent nuclear proliferation experts. And of course, ex CIA officer Philip Giraldi.

Luke Ryland: Ok – let’s start with your interview with David Albright - what did he have to say?

MV: To us, he was the most credible guy, someone who was able to document something really specific: that is, the role of Turkey in the build-up of the Pakistani nuclear program. Albright told us that Turkey started helping since the very beginning. We didn’t know that. He confirmed that some stuff most likely ended up in Al-Qaeda’s hands. And to us, that was sign that the cycle was complete: we had the Christian fundamentalists, ultra right-wing zionists and the Muslim fundamentalists all in the same bed, because of their hatred of communism.

All this because in the Eighties, the Saudis, the Muslim world, the Israelis, the Americans and China… all of them had a common enemy - the Soviet Union - most of them because they hated communism, and China because of Russia being a dangerous neighbour. This loose, yet determined, coalition waged a proxy war in Afghanistan and won it! At the time, countering Pakistan’s nuclear program was a concern for the U.S but not a priority.

Knowing the jihadists appetite for terror, we have to worry that they may have access to a nuclear weapon. What a legacy for the future!

All this because in the 80s, the U.S chose to see the Mujahideen as freedom fighters. After the Soviet debacle, it appeared all too clearly that many of these freedom fighters that the U.S had helped turn into invincible technoguerillas were Muslim fundamentalists now ready to fight, with the help of their friends from the Arabic Peninsula, a jihad without borders...

Under Reagan, the free world fought the ‘Evil Empire’ (the Soviet Union). But Reagan did not care about the likely post-war situation: the minute the Afghan war was finished, Pakistan was convinced that the U.S would stop supporting them against India. And this came to be true! In the 90s, the U.S started to be less tolerant towards the growing islamist activity in Pakistan, vis-à-vis the Pakistani bomb. Two ex-allies were drifting apart, quite logically.

Today, the Neocons say that we’re faced with a new threat: the ‘Axis of Evil’. What Neocons forget to tell you is most of those labeled as ‘Axis of Evil’ were at some stage U.S clients or protégés and they themselves did business with these countries. Sometimes private business. Drawing from Sibel’s case, one can assume that some of these Neocons even engaged in nuclear black-market activities. That’s very disturbing!

LR: OK, Philip Giraldi now. What did he have to say?

MV: Philip Giraldi appears in the last chapter of the film. Giraldi is the one who connects the final dots. He was stationed in Turkey in the 80s for the CIA. He knows the players in the game. He recently published a remarkable article in the American Conservative on Sibel’s case. Giraldi obviously understood most of what was to be understood about it.

As explained before, Giraldi knows the reason why there was a military relationship between Turkey and Israel for the last 30 years - Turkey wanting to get access to weapons in the US and Israel being interested in becoming friendly with a Muslim country. That's the starting point.

Beyond that, he understands the role of the Military Industrial Complex, both in the US and in Israel and Turkey - for example, Turkish Generals retain commissions on the works and the production lines of the Turkish arms manufacturing companies - in other words, baksheesh.

Giraldi then pointed to the neocons who are intertwined in the U.S-Turkey-Israel triangle and also insists on the fact that these people have been connected to the Turkish government, Israeli arms companies and the Military Industrial Complex in the U.S, as he says "making money, doling out influence."

Giraldi also insisted very specifically about the FBI investigations on Feith and Perle and some others. The belief we had before meeting Giraldi was that Turkey recruited the ‘crème de la crème’ of Israel's friends in the U.S, so that they would then have access to not only Washington’s officials, but also to the Pentagon and its most hi-tech weaponry. Giraldi confirmed that.

LR: In his article, Giraldi says that the false end-user certificates were used by Israel and Turkey to provide weapons to both China and India - I hadn't heard of India being involved.

MV: Well, in the 1990’s, it is well know that Israel has sold China sensitive U.S military technology. For almost two decades now, China and Israel have spied on the U.S more than any other country in the world. In the film, Philip Giraldi states that the FBI does an annual compilation of who spies most on the U.S. As he says : "The result is always the same: number one is China, number two is Israel. "

India is a different story. In Sibel’s case, some witnesses fingered the ‘India’ component, but for reasons already mentioned we didn’t go further (laughs)… By the way, if you look at the Giza case, it’s public record that the Israeli broker Asher Karni was also selling the nuclear detonators he got from Giza to India.

LR: In Giraldi's article, he also mentions Paul Wolfowitz and Stephen Solarz, did you come across them?

MV: Well – Giraldi mentions Stephen Solarz - but again, it's just indirectly linked to Sibel's case. In the mid 80s, Steven Solarz, a Jewish congressman and a strong supporter of Israel, was also an advocate for Ankara, ‘the’ U.S friend of Turkey at the times. But Solarz is interesting for other reasons linked to Richard Barlow’s case, back in the 80s.*

Again, what’s absolutely amazing with national security whistle-blowers, and intelligence officers with integrity, and that list includes people as different as Sibel, Rich Barlow, Valerie Plame, Robert Baer (and many others…), it’s the perfect correlation between the small picture (the fight of an individual) and the big picture (world events).

In the case of the four individuals, I just mentioned, there’s something more more. All four of them worked, in various capacities, on issues related to radical Islamic groups and their connections but it’s the U.S governmment who ignored their concerns and sometimes tried to silence them… How strange?

-----------------------------------------
Next (and final) installment Thursday-ish

(* I removed a paragraph here regarding Barlow and Solarz because it was inaccurate)

2006-10-23T21:46:00.000+10:00

Given the interest in my "Daniel Ellsberg: Hastert got suitcases of Al Qaeda heroin cash, should be in jail" post (orange version) over the weekend, I thought it might be a good idea to detail the specific, multiple, separate claims of bribery against Dennis Hastert.

These claims were reported in Vanity Fair, and expanded on elsewhere by Daniel Ellsberg, Sibel Edmonds and others. The 'claims' are documented via wiretaps etc at the FBI - they are well known to people at the FBI, and the State Department, and the Justice Department, and have been reported to Congress, to the 911 Commission, and (in part) to most of the major media outlets who refuse to touch the story (see the action item downstairs.)

The quick version: Hastert took the following bribes: 1) 'suitcases of cash' - delivered to his home - from Turkish heroin dealers 2) $500,000 for blocking a bill recognizing Turkey's genocide of Armenians 3) illegal campaign contributions from foreign interests.

Sibel has put out a challenge:

"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."

see you below the fold.

(I apologize if this post is a bit 'clunky' - I kinda rushed it out)
----------------------------------------------------------------

In David Rose's blockbuster (but whitewashed) article in Vanity Fair, there are three separate bribery claims:

a) Hastert received tens of thousands of dollars in illegal campaign contributions

b) Hastert received tens of thousands of dollars in surreptitious payments in exchange for political favors and information. These bribes were apparently delivered in cash, in suitcases. We don't know specifically what these payments were for.

c) Hastert is believed to have accepted another $500,000. Reportedly in return for pulling a Congressional resolution acknowledging the Armenian genocide.

Got that? At least three different bribes that we know about.

We aren't exactly sure who was doing the actual bribing, or whether there are more than one group that 'owns' Hastert. There are three groups suspected of bribing Hastert, and there is probably significant overlap between the groups.

The first group is a criminal element of the Military Industrial Complex, represented primarily by Richard Perle, Doug Feith and Marc Grossman among others - generally using AIPAC and the American Turkish Council as front organizations.

The second group suspected of bribing Hastert is the 'mafia-like' Turkish 'Deep State', probably a mix of Turkish military, heroin producers and drug-runners. It is suspected that these funds are laundered through 'lobbyists' - originally Perle & Feith's company International Advisors Inc, and later (and currently) through Bob Livingston's company The Livingston Group.

The third group is a bit more hazy, but it is suspected that it is a group of Turkish heroin 'baba' (mafia) operating in the US, probably headquarted in Chicago. This group appears to use front organisations such as the Assembly of Turkish American Associations (A.T.A.A.) and the Turkish American Cultural Alliance (T.A.C.A.)

The following is from my interview with Mathieu Verboud, co-director of the new movie, Kill The Messenger:

Mathieu: In our cast, David Rose (the author of the Vanity Fair article) had the crucial role of the guy who makes the first important revelations. He was the man for the job. He has a great vision of the whole thing, he's a great story teller, but at the same time carefully sticking to what he knows. He is the only one who has spoken to people who know what’s on the (FBI's) tapes. He met with the sources, and as he says in the film, ‘these sources were very nervous about the tapes’. His testimony helps strengthening the pillars of the story - yes, the tapes involved Turkish officials, some of them working for the embassy in the Washington, and others in the consulate in Chicago. Money in exchange secrets, basically what we could read in Vanity Fair… When that was done, he described how he found out about Hastert, and then alluded to what we expose in the last segment of the film: the Neocons connection.

And from another interview, here's Sibel:

“…what happened was, FBI had this information since 1997. In 1999, the Clinton Administration actually asked the Department of Justice to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate Hastert, and certain other elected officials that were not named in this (Vanity Fair) article, to be investigated formally. And the Department of Justice actually went about appointing this prosecutor, but after the Administration changed they quashed that investigation and they closed it despite the fact they had all sorts of evidence, again I’m talking about wiretaps, documents- paper documents- that was highly explosive and could have been easily used to indict the Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert. That investigation was closed in 2001, and this was around the time I started reporting my cases to the Congress.”

And then there's this from my interview with Larisa Alexandrovna which clouds things a little:

Luke: And the American Turkish Council and the Speaker of the House?

Larisa: Yes, the Vanity Fair piece of course. Now my understanding from the sources used by the writer (David Rose) that they had provided a great deal more on this account, but legal folks got involved and wanted certain things left out. I think that it is absolutely fair to believe this account to be true. First of all, the Speaker has yet to go on the record to fully deny these charges - apart from a glib reference. Secondly, the key witness/ whistleblower in this case, that is Sibel, is gagged under a rarely used gag, the states secret gag, so she cannot present her argument in court. The evidence also, from what I understand of the case does support her claims. So it is fair to say that there is reason to believe the Speaker Hastert is indeed taking money from foreign nationals, that is bribes, in exchange for something. In fact, the evidence was such that the FBI took this to the DOJ and an investigation was being assembled when the new administration came into office and Ashcroft, the then new Attorney General shut it down. Clearly shutting down an FBI/DOJ investigation instead of allowing it to move forward would also support the allegations against Hastert, but he is not alone in these allegations by any measure.

Luke: Well there were two allegations in the article. One was the ongoing bribery, and the other was the $500,000 for pulling the Armenian Genocide bill.

LA: No - well - sort of, but not really. The point is that there are only a couple of people who know, and obviously I can't report it and the key person who knows is gagged. So that leaves no room to fully and openly explore this. One would hope that in a democracy a citizen would have her right in court and the politically appointed AG would not shut down an FBI sting operation that had been going on for several years. One would hope that foreign nationals would not be bribing members of Congress and I don’t believe, at least from what I have seen, that these bribes have anything to do with a bill that Hastert may or may not have taken to the floor. Remember, this is about “making cookies” and those factions that we alluded to earlier. But if you really want to understand why Sibel is gagged, you need to focus on what happened with Hastert - not Hastert himself, but what happened with Hastert - because THAT is the holy grail to understanding why she is gagged - and also to some extent understanding Brewster Jennings. Not Plame - but Brewster Jennings...

Luke: Wow. That's interesting. Sibel described the way they quashed that investigation into Hastert in an interview recently - she said that it happened at the same time that she started reporting to Congress....

LA: You are right. If Hastert is not being bribed, if these are false allegations, then he should stand up and go to court and address the accusers in court and say 'no I didnt do this' - or even in public. He should allow himself to be questioned and prove his innocence. But to have somebody gagged and to ignore the issue as though that should somehow indicate innocence is not very convincing. So until he corrects the record, and because Sibel is gagged - which gives her more credibility than him - I would say that it's quite probably true that he is being bribed. But I cannot emphasize enough that Hastert is not alone in this or even his “faction” as it were, rather, this is rampant abuse should these allegations be true.

Phil Giraldi's blockbuster article about Sibel's case doesnt even mention Hastert - so I don't think that he is 'central' to Sibel's allegations. However, I strongly suspect that if we knew who was bribing Hastert, and why, then we'd be able to unravel large chunks of the story - and I strongly presume that it is mostly centered on certain neocons profiting from sales of military hardware and secrets, and I suspect that there's a side-business involving heroin manufacture and distribution.

Now - let's switch back to the Ellsberg interview.

Daniel Ellsberg reiterates Sibel Edmonds' specific claim that Dennis Hastert received suitcases of cash at his home from Turkish heroin money and that Hastert should be in jail, along with his friends.

Kris Welch: I know you just met with Sibel Edmonds - what's the key thing about Sibel Edmonds' case?

Daniel Ellsberg: For several years, Sibel has been really hoping to get her case into a court, or into a hearing room in Congress. That's pretty well impossible with Republicans in charge of hearings - they won't hold any. She has told her story on a classified basis to several congressional venues, plus the 911 Commission - none of whom have done anything with it so far - it's too hot for them, essentially. You get a pretty good clue as to why the congressional people haven't pressed it in the article about her in the current Vanity Fair issue. Sibel is not yet in a position to tell all, but has been telling more and more.

Let me suggest two interviews with her that have come out since the VF article that go a good deal further than VF chose to print. VF did print ten pages and they got a lot but there was a lot that the reporter had, David Rose, that didn't get into the article, and a lot of that is in these two other interviews - both at antiwar.com, Chris Deliso and Scott Horton. In those interviews she finally reveals more of what she wished that VF had put out. Namely, if I can summarize it quickly, Al Qaeda, she's been saying to congress, according to these interviews, is financed 95% by drug money - drug traffic to which the US government shows a blind eye, has been ignoring, because it very heavily involves allies and assets of ours - such as Turkey, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan - all the 'Stans - in a drug traffic where the opium originates in Afghanistan, is processed in Turkey, and delivered to Europe where it furnishes 96% of Europe's heroin, by Albanians, either in Albania or Kosovo - Albanian Muslims in Kosovo - basically the KLA, the Kosovo Liberation Army which we backed heavily in that episode at the end of the century.

It was known at the time that the KLA consisted largely of drug-dealers, and they still do... Now, all of these people are, for various reasons, allies, or clients, of the US - and the fact that they get a large amount of their income from the heroin trade is something the US just regards as the price of doing business with them. That means that not only is the heroin coming into our markets where it furnishes, according to Sibel based on her FBI experience, some 14% of our heroin - up from 4% before the invasion of Afghanistan.

The major effect of that is that terrorist gangs are taking a cut of this, including Al Qaeda, which essentially taxes this traffic as it goes through the various lands where each 'band' pays a percentage as they hand it off. In other words, the US is in effect, endorsing - well, 'endorsing' is too strong a word - 'permitting', definitely permitting, or 'not acting against,' a heroin trade - which not only corrupts our cities and our city politics, AND our congress, as Sibel makes very specific - but is financing the terrorist organization that constitutes a genuine threat to us. And this seems to be a fact that is accepted by our top leaders, according to Sibel, for various geopolitical reasons, and for corrupt reasons as well. Sometimes things are simpler than they might appear - and they involve envelopes of cash. Sibel says that suitcases of cash have been delivered to the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, at his home, near Chicago, from Turkish sources, knowing that a lot of that is drug money.

Now these are pretty inflammatory allegations, let's say, and it's note-worthy that they haven't even been picked up by the mainstream press. The Vanity Fair article made that plain, though not in as much detail as the antiwar.com interviews - but not one major newspaper I don't think has picked up her allegations against Hastert which are very specific, and one would think very important.

Kris Welch: Dennis Hastert's name is mentioned in the Vanity Fair article issue...

Daniel Ellsberg: Yes - but in another connection - namely that he sold a legislative move of removing from a vote a resolution that he had earlier backed, raising the price, of course, of removing it - condemning Turkish genocide of Armenians.

And for the first time, a legislative leader (Hastert) had backed such a resolution which meant that it went through the committee for the first time, and was headed for a vote - in order to help a Republican in Glendale, near Los Angeles, James Rogan, who had a large Armenian constituency. So all things were moving ahead, at last, after many years of them trying to do this, and at the last moment, Hastert removed it from the vote, removed it from the calendar - and according to the information claimed by Sibel, Turkish sources were claiming to have achieved this for a price of half a million dollars - paid to Hastert. Again, this would seem a story that... certainly the Armenians are picking it up, as they should.

Kris Welch: Well, and the Turks in Turkey are now attacking Sibel Edmonds

Daniel Ellsberg: Sibel is an 'enemy of Turkey' - she was a Turkish citizen, now an American, but she has some family in Turkey who are now threatened by this exposure. Her picture was on the front-page of every Turkish newspaper - denouncing her as a 'whore,' as a 'traitor' and a turncoat of various kinds and she's had many threatening letters, including death threats. So it's a very serious situation for her, and the contrast between the news in Turkey, and the silence in America about allegations about Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House, is quite a contrast.

[snip]

Kris Welch: And these wiretaps that she translated went back to 1997... so she heard all these conversations, people bragging that they'd given this money

Daniel Ellsberg: Yes - these were people from the American Turkish Council - which is a quote 'lobbying group' - or as she has described it up till now, as a 'semi-legitimate organization'

[snip]

Daniel Ellsberg: ...Now, since she's a person who has been checked out a good deal by some of the senators she's talked to - Senator Leahy, Senator Grassley, Republican, they have always said, repeatedly, that she's extremely credible. The FBI agents we've talked to have, in every respect that was raised, have confirmed her story - that she's a very credible witness. Representative Waxman, to whose staff she's spoken has said the same. So she is very credible. That's a fact. So when she says things like this, they do deserve to get picked up and followed up, and they are not being.

Kris Welch: Well, and her credibility might have something to do with the fact that she has been completely silenced, she says the most gagged person in history, by this very little used States Secrets privilege

[snip]

Daniel Ellsberg: I think the stuff that Sibel Edmonds is talking about - it's absolutely appropriate to get rid of Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House and put him in jail, actually, and to lose him his job, and some other people.

If people will press their congress representatives - and I suppose Armenian people are already doing this, because they were directly stabbed by Hastert on this point - but the whole country, of course, needs to be concerned about Dennis Hastert. I will believe Sibel on this - that he is guilty - well, let me put it this way, he's innocent till proven guilty. I believe he has earned the right to a fair trial - probably several fair trials! And I hope he really gets them...

[snip]

In 2006, we really do need to get Democrats... I think they're partisan enough to follow the voters and do what the voters want - and voters would say either 'Fire these guys, like Hastert, and the President, or we fire you' - and that, as they say on Capitol Hill, they may not see the light, but they'll feel the heat.

(For the record, yes, Ellsberg is only 'reporting' what Sibel says - he doesn't have direct knowledge of the events - but in this interview and elsewhere, he repeatedly says that he respects her, admires her, believes what she says, and calls her his hero)

And here we have Sibel and David Rose on Democracy Now:

SIBEL EDMONDS: The Vanity Fair article points out to Turkic -- countries. And it's very interesting. To this date, we are not hearing anything about targeting, you know, certain Central Asian countries. They are not speaking about the link between the narcotics and al Qaeda. Yes, we are hearing about them coming down on some charities as the real funds behind al Qaeda, but most of al Qaeda's funding is not through these charity organizations. It's through narcotics. And have you heard anything to this date, anything about these issues which we have had information since 1997? And as I would again emphasize, we are talking about countries. And they are blocking this information, and also the fact that certain officials in this country are engaged in treason against the United States and its interests and its national security, be it the Department of State or certain elected officials.

[SNIP]

AMY GOODMAN: And David Rose, the issue of the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, and conversations overheard that link his office with improper dealings with Turkish nationals, can you talk about particular legislation?

DAVID ROSE: Well, there was – there were two things, I understand, which those who were wiretapped, whose conversations were recorded and translated, referred to. One was the controversial deal to sell helicopters, attack helicopters, to Turkey, which was an issue of great controversy in the late 1990s. At that point, Turkey was fighting a pretty hot civil war with the Kurdish separatists in the east of the country. There were allegations of human rights abuses and so forth, and some in America thought it was wrong that Turkey should be sold several billion dollars worth of attack helicopters in those circumstances. So some of the calls allegedly referred to the hope that the Congress would approve that very large weapons sale.

But the second occasion or second event which is allegedly referred to in these wiretaps is the Armenian genocide resolution which came before the House in 2000. Now, the Armenian lobby has made attempts with some support -- I mean, Senator Bob Dole was a very great supporter of this back in the 1980s. The Armenians have tried to get the Congress to pass a genocide resolution so that – which would basically state that the mass murder of Armenians in Turkey that was carried out after 1915 was a genocide, and some countries have indeed passed such resolutions. Some states have in America. This resolution never really got anywhere until in 2000, Dennis Hastert, as House Speaker, announced he would support it.

Now, at the time, analysts noted that there was a tight congressional race in California, in which the Armenian community might just swing it in favor of the Republican incumbent. But what is significant, the resolution had passed the Human Rights Subcommittee of the House. It passed the International Relations Committee, but on the eve of the House vote, the full House vote, Dennis Hastert withdrew the resolution...

Well, whether or not these allegations have substance is not something that I am able to state with any knowledge, but it is said that in the wiretaps that were translated by Sibel Edmonds, reference was made to this very controversial question of the House vote. One of the Turkish targets of these wiretaps claimed that the price for getting Dennis Hastert to withdraw the resolution would be $500,000. Now, I do emphasize there's no evidence at all that he received such a payment, but that is what is said to have been recorded in one of the wiretaps.

David Rose is a key source for the movie, Kill The Messenger, because he is the only one who has spoken to people who know what’s on the FBI tapes about Hastert being bribed - this is what Rose is referring to in the trailer when he says: "The people that I've talked to about these tapes are extremely nervous"

Now - some of you have said that these are extraordinary allegations, and therefore they demand extraordinary proof - I agree, with a few twists:

There are people at the Dept of Justice who already know all of these details. The Dept. of State, too. And the FBI.

Sibel says that her claims are all backed up by wiretaps and documents and so forth. I presume that she knows the case numbers or some other way to identify them. 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.""

If we lift the State Secrets gag, then the 'innocent' can clear their names. If not, then either Sibel is free to 'slander' whoever she likes, or we can presume that her claims have merit.

Now - here's where I need your help. Sibel has given all this information - via the appropriate channels - to the FBI, to Congress, to the 911 Commission, and all the way to the Supreme Court - without any luck. A year ago, she also gave it to Newsweek, Time Magazine, New York Times & Washington Post, again, without any luck. For one reason or other, there's a blackout on the story.

She currently has at least two veteran FBI agents, with first hand information, who are willing to go on the record and confirm the entire story (Hastert, ATC, ATAA, Livingston Group...).

All we need is one reporter. They can contact Sibel here. Here's where you all come in - I'm not sure if you are familiar with the SpotlightProject - basically it's a way that you can send a blog-post to a bunch of reporters and ask them to follow up on a story. There are only a select few bloggers in the project so far - but thankfully, one of them - Susie Madrak - has written a post about this story in the last couple of days. So here's what I want you to do:

go here

select the journos who you think should write about this story

click 'Add' (at the top)

click 'Next'

write a brief note about why you think this story is important (you can direct them back to this post if you desire)

Go on. Do it. We are inches away from taking both the Senate and the House - and the journos have been sitting on this information for a year - they are aware of all of the background info, and they are ready to shiv Hastert given the Foley shenanigans. Democrat control of two Houses depends on you)

Go to it!

Ellsberg: Hastert got suitcases of Al Qaeda heroin cash, should be in jail

2006-10-21T21:40:00.000+10:00

Over at DU, Randy mentioned an ' untranscribed interview between Ellsberg and Kris Welch of KPFA from Sept. '05'' - I actually hadn't heard it before (dammit!) - so I found it, and it is no longer 'untranscribed' (at least the Sibel related bits.)

Daniel Ellsberg said that Dennis Hastert received suitcases of cash at his home from Turkish heroin money and that Hastert should be in jail, along with his friends.

He also says that people in the State Department, and in nuclear labs, are paid in 'cold cash' for secrets that are sold on the nuclear black market.

He also says that a Dem Congress "could be pressed into holding genuine investigations of the torture, of the corruption, getting rid of Hastert, and starting impeachment proceedings."

All errors are mine, some snippage, usual disclaimers, etc.

---------------------------------

Kris Welch: I know you just met with Sibel Edmonds - what's the key thing about Sibel Edmonds' case?

Daniel Ellsberg: For several years, Sibel has been really hoping to get her case into a court, or into a hearing room in Congress. That's pretty well impossible with Republicans in charge of hearings - they won't hold any. She has told her story on a classified basis to several congressional venues, plus the 911 Commission - none of whom have done anything with it so far - it's too hot for them, essentially. You get a pretty good clue as to why the congressional people haven't pressed it in the article about her in the current Vanity Fair issue. Sibel is not yet in a position to tell all, but has been telling more and more.

Let me suggest two interviews with her that have come out since the VF article that go a good deal further than VF chose to print. VF did print ten pages and they got a lot but there was a lot that the reporter had, David Rose, that didn't get into the article, and a lot of that is in these two other interviews - both at antiwar.com, Chris Deliso and Scott Horton. In those interviews she finally reveals more of what she wished that VF had put out. Namely, if I can summarize it quickly, Al Qaeda, she's been saying to congress, according to these interviews, is financed 95% by drug money - drug traffic to which the US government shows a blind eye, has been ignoring, because it very heavily involves allies and assets of ours - such as Turkey, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan - all the 'Stans - in a drug traffic where the opium originates in Afghanistan, is processed in Turkey, and delivered to Europe where it furnishes 96% of Europe's heroin, by Albanians, either in Albania or Kosovo - Albanian Muslims in Kosovo - basically the KLA, the Kosovo Liberation Army which we backed heavily in that episode at the end of the century.

It was known at the time that the KLA consisted largely of drug-dealers, and they still do. They're dominating the politics, pretty much, of Kosovo right now. Now, all of these people are, for various reasons, allies, or clients, of the US - and the fact that they get a large amount of their income from the heroin trade is something the US just regards as the price of doing business with them. That means that not only is the heroin coming into our markets where it furnishes, according to Sibel based on her FBI experience, some 14% of our heroin - up from 4% before the invasion of Afghanistan.

The major effect of that is that terrorist gangs are taking a cut of this, including Al Qaeda, which essentially taxes this traffic as it goes through the various lands where each 'band' pays a percentage as they hand it off. In other words, the US is in effect, endorsing - well, 'endorsing' is too strong a word - 'permitting', definitely permitting, or 'not acting against,' a heroin trade - which not only corrupts our cities and our city politics, AND our congress, as Sibel makes very specific - but is financing the terrorist organization that constitutes a genuine threat to us. And this seems to be a fact that is accepted by our top leaders, according to Sibel, for various geopolitical reasons, and for corrupt reasons as well. Sometimes things are simpler than they might appear - and they involve envelopes of cash. Sibel says that suitcases of cash have been delivered to the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, at his home, near Chicago, from Turkish sources, knowing that a lot of that is drug money.

Now these are pretty inflammatory allegations, let's say, and it's note-worthy that they haven't even been picked up by the mainstream press. The Vanity Fair article made that plain, though not in as much detail as the antiwar.com interviews - but not one major newspaper I don't think has picked up her allegations against Hastert which are very specific, and one would think very important.

Kris Welch: Dennis Hastert's name is mentioned in the Vanity Fair article issue...

Daniel Ellsberg: Yes - but in another connection - namely that he sold a legislative move of removing from a vote a resolution that he had earlier backed, raising the price, of course, of removing it - condemning Turkish genocide of Armenians.

And for the first time, a legislative leader (Hastert) had backed such a resolution which meant that it went through the committee for the first time, and was headed for a vote - in order to help a Republican in Glendale, near Los Angeles, James Rogan, who had a large Armenian constituency. So all things were moving ahead, at last, after many years of them trying to do this, and at the last moment, Hastert removed it from the vote, removed it from the calendar - and according to the information claimed by Sibel, Turkish sources were claiming to have achieved this for a price of half a million dollars - paid to Hastert. Again, this would seem a story that... certainly the Armenians are picking it up, as they should.

Kris Welch: Well, and the Turks in Turkey are now attacking Sibel Edmonds

Daniel Ellsberg: Sibel is an 'enemy of Turkey' - she was a Turkish citizen, now an American, but she has some family in Turkey who are now threatened by this exposure. Her picture was on the front-page of every Turkish newspaper - denouncing her as a 'whore,' as a 'traitor' and a turncoat of various kinds and she's had many threatening letters, including death threats. So it's a very serious situation for her, and the contrast between the news in Turkey, and the silence in America about allegations about Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House, is quite a contrast.

Kris Welch: And, of course, she complains in the antiwar.com interviews that the VF article chose to focus on this Armenian story - which is not the story - and that's her problem. She says when the media does do anything about her story, they focus on 'oh - here's this poor whistleblower' instead of focusing on what the facts of her whistleblowing might be.

Daniel Ellsberg: Well, I think it's true that - as my friend and mentor Peter Dale Scott has said to me over the last 20 years or more - the American media maintain an almost unbroken silence on the connection between US policy and the drug trade, specifically the CIA and the drug trade. The silence is broken, typically, only to dismiss it, only to say 'No - there's nothing to this.' The 911 Commission, for instance, as Peter pointed out to me, went out of it's way simply to say that there was no connection between 911 and drug connections at all. Now, according to Sibel, that's absolutely wrong - that the connections through Turkey, in various ways, are very important.

Kris Welch: OK - and Sibel got this information because she applied for this after 911, wanting to do something real for her American patriotism - this is what she says she was motivated by...

Daniel Ellsberg: She is very patriotic...

Kris Welch: And these wiretaps that she translated went back to 1997... so she heard all these conversations, people bragging that they'd given this money

Daniel Ellsberg: Yes - these were people from the American Turkish Council - which is a quote 'lobbying group' - or as she has described it up till now, as a 'semi-legitimate organization'

Kris Welch: And Brent Scowcroft is on the board of directors?

Daniel Ellsberg: Yes. Brent Scowcroft is the head of board of directors - every member of the military industrial complex - Lockheed, Raytheon - everybody who does business with Turkey is a member of this group. That doesn't necessarily mean that they know... well, there's a great deal of arms trading...

Kris Welch: and that's where a lot of this money comes from too..

Daniel Ellsberg: and a lot of that is as legitimate as arms trading ever is - as merchants of death - but it's a legal trade, perhaps unfortunately - but aside from that, there's a great deal of dealing of information in illicit arms trades including, she says, nuclear information, from our nuclear weapons labs - for which cold cash is paid - to people in the labs, and to people, she says, to people in the State Department - who have essentially given 'OKs' for various trades, or have turned a blind eye - deliberately - to it. So there are messages in these wiretaps about people getting thousands of dollars - this is small potatoes - but in the State Department they come cheap apparently!

Kris Welch: As Sibel says, the State Department is the most corrupt element of our government

Daniel Ellsberg: Yes - and that's an amazing statement (laughs) when you consider the competition. I myself was amazed to hear that, and I told her that, because my sense of foreign service officers, and the State Department in general, was that they had many flaws, and many limitations, but I would have said that corruption was not part of that...

Kris Welch: And relatively speaking, they're "the good guys" with the recent foreign policy

Daniel Ellsberg: Well, it depends who's in charge. Under Powell, to a degree, they were sidelined, they had essentially no influence. But when they're 'good'...

Kris Welch: ...They're impotent

Daniel Ellsberg: Good children are meant to be seen not heard!

But Sibel said, very flatly, and she's extremely credible to me, she said 'That's just flatly wrong. People in the State Department take cash.' Now, since she's a person who has been checked out a good deal by some of the senators she's talked to - Senator Leahy, Senator Grassley, Republican, they have always said, repeatedly, that she's extremely credible. The FBI agents we've talked to have, in every respect that was raised, have confirmed her story - that she's a very credible witness. Representative Waxman, to whose staff she's spoken has said the same. So she is very credible. That's a fact. So when she says things like this, they do deserve to get picked up and followed up, and they are not being.

Kris Welch: Well, and her credibility might have something to do with the fact that she has been completely silenced, she says the most gagged person in history, by this very little used States Secrets privilege

[SNIP - for 20 minutes Ellsberg discusses martial law & the shredding of the constitution, 'the next 911, the Reichstag fire')

Daniel Ellsberg: It's very important to get the Republicans out before the next 911 - there's one process for doing that. I think the stuff that Sibel Edmonds is talking about - it's absolutely appropriate to get rid of Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House and put him in jail, actually, and to lose him his job, and some other people.

If people will press their congress representatives - and I suppose Armenian people are already doing this, because they were directly stabbed by Hastert on this point - but the whole country, of course, needs to be concerned about Dennis Hastert. I will believe Sibel on this - that he is guilty - well, let me put it this way, he's innocent till proven guilty. I believe he has earned the right to a fair trial - probably several fair trials! And I hope he really gets them - along with Rove - he's another person who seems to have earned the right to a fair trial, as have Scooter Libby and others.

That will hamstring the administration, but not get us out of Iraq. I would hope that the scandal the Republicans have earned in this, if it can be pursued, would get us what otherwise seemed impossible, a Democratic congress, a Democratic House which can impeach. The only way to impeach Bush is to get a Democratic House in 2006 - and just putting Democrats alone in, of course, doesn't get us out of Iraq. Putting John Kerry in, I don't think, would have got us out of Iraq. We definitely need a new bunch of Democrats in there - and new leaders. I'm very pleased to see Feingold, the one senator who had the guts to vote against the PATRIOT Act - just as Barbara Lee was the one person in congress to vote against the original delegation of power to the president after 911. One person in each case, like Cindy Sheehan, one person can start something - Feingold is my candidate right now to lead on this. But that's looking forward to 2008.

In 2006, we really do need to get Democrats because venal, and cowardly, and lazy, as they may be, they are people who could be pressed into holding genuine investigations of the torture, of the corruption, getting rid of Hastert, and starting impeachment proceedings. I think they're partisan enough to follow the voters and do what the voters want - and voters would say either 'Fire these guys, like Hastert, and the President, or we fire you' - and that, as they say on Capitol Hill, they may not see the light, but they'll feel the heat.
---------------------------------

KTM interview, part 6: 911 and FBI Incompetence

2006-10-21T10:25:00.000+10:00

This is part 6 of my interview with Mathieu Verboud, co-director of the film about Sibel Edmonds, Kill the Messenger. (see Part One, Two, Three, Four, Five))

Here we talk about 9/11 (a little), FBI incompetence and some of Sibel's supporters in the film
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Luke Ryland: Right - speaking of terrible consequences - you mentioned earlier that the first thing that you heard about Sibel 's case was that it had something to do with 911. What do you know about the connections between her case and 911?

Mathieu Verboud: Some small things and some bigger things. The small things are more precise, and the larger issues are more diluted. From some private conversations with Sibel, it's our understanding that during her time at the FBI, she may have heard things, let’s say about the existence of certain tapes related to Bin Laden. I won’t go into further details and quite frankly, as far as 9/11 goes, the event, and the preparation - that's all I know.

But there are other issues related to 9/11. First is WHY was 9/11 possible. Sibel’s story helps us find an answer…

9/11 happened because the jihad needed new targets. Again, this is the backfiring component of the 1980s alliance between the U.S and Pakistan. Then, you wonder HOW 9/11 was possible. Well, you have a whole set of answers to that and these are domestic issues : lack of preparedness, complacency, incompetence, risk aversity. And it went to such absurd extremes!

Look for example at the case of Bob Wright from the counter-terrorism division of the FBI, based in Chicago. His managers refused to crack down a Hamas cell because that meant closing a case and when a case is closed, FBI agents have to open new ones to get a promotion. The thing is the FBI counter-terrorism squad in Chicago didn’t have any case waiting to be opened, maybe because Hamas was the only terrorist threat in town. Anyway, the result is the Hamas cell was just… ignored!

When you see that, you understand Bob Wright’s frustration and you wonder whether the Executive Branch, be it under Clinton or Bush, ever assessed the risk, however remote, of a major terrorist attack with commercial airliners. Everyone seemed to have forgotten that the WTC had already been bombed by Islamists in 1993. Or maybe no one cared. And 9/11 happened. Did the U.S have foreknowledge of the attacks ? Yes. Did the U.S have foreknowledge of the date? I don’t know. Did the U.S plan the attacks? I don’t know. Maybe ineptitude, indifference explain it all.

Then, with Bush, things got even worse : the lie to the nation about WMD’s, Iraq rather than Bin Laden, the politization of the intelligence community and of the judiciary, the insatiable appetite for classification, the obsene carpet-bagging in Iraq with big weapon companies calling the shots from behind the scene. And this is freedom? No, it’s a recipe for the elimination of freedom.

LR: Ok - and where does the heroin trafficking fit into Sibel's story?

Mathieu: Well, the poppy trade is interesting, but we don’t have very specific knowledge about the connections to Sibel. All we know is that for the last 30 years, Turkey has been the leading country in the world in terms of processing heroin and also that the drug business is just another business for many players in this country. It helps make money, fund illegal activities.

But again, this started a long time ago.

LR: Getting back to the film - who did you interview?

MV: Well, there are a lot of people whom we interviewed but didn't make it to the final cut of the film, because we needed to focus on Sibel’s line of operations.

First, we have the "supporters." Coming first as a a great introduction to Sibel, is John Cole who was a Counter-Intelligence officer at the FBI in the nineties – his case is linked to Sibel’s since the very begining. The first ever article on Sibel (the Washington Post dated June 19, 2002) mentions his name as a possible co-witness. John was indeed a precious witness for us. He was born in France (laughs)… he is a true U.S patriot. He always wanted ‘to do what’s right’. John often comes back to the same point: "As a public servant, I took an oath of office to protect the country from its enemies, both foreign and domestic. So did Sibel." Well, obviously many people within the neocon community fit the portrait of a domestic enemy. John was also one of many intelligence whistle-blowers who described the risk-averse mentality, the sheer incompetence of many people in mid-management positions in the agencies.

Then, we have Ann Beeson and Ben Wizner (the two ACLU lawyers) and some prominent members of the NSWBC, the national security whisle-blowers coalition Sibel created in 2004. We also include in this group of supporters this very nice musician whom we filmed in a New York club performing the song he wrote on Sibel: Gary Hood (youtube). Gary is an early fan.

Then, we have the "experts" coming in. Their role in the film is to expose Sibel’s secret…

------------------------------------
Next Up: When the truth comes out from the CIA…. Probably on Monday.

Verboud Interview, Part 5. Valerie Plame and Sibel Edmonds

2006-10-19T21:29:00.000+10:00

This is part 5 of my interview with Mathieu Verboud, co-director of the film about Sibel Edmonds, Kill the Messenger.
(see Part One, Part Two, Part Three, and Part Four)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Valerie Plame and Sibel Edmonds…

Mathieu Verboud: But let me go back to how we found about a key point in Sibel’s case : its connection to the Plame case. Around May 2005, we discovered Plame’s story in a Vanity Fair article. We knew nothing about it. We learnt that Plame was Ambassador Wilson’s wife. But a few months later, we also learnt that she had been working in counter-proliferation at the CIA. And that looked odd to us. After Barlow in the 80s, then Sibel, another U.S intelligence officer, another public servant knowledgable about nuclear black market was facing the intimidation tactics from the government. Could that just be coïncidence? Particularly since Grossman was publicly known to be involved in the Plame case along with… guess whom? Steve Hadley! The man who sealed Barlow’s fate.

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.

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. This man has nerves! Turkey, for example, was known to him as being a transit point for drugs but not as the biggest opium processing country in the world. In his always soft manners, he repeatedly tried to make us look like we had ‘caricatural views’ of Turkey.

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. But you know, it can backfire at us - because in the end somebody might say that there is too much speculation. And it is true that we have no factual evidence of his involvement in the case.

That’s the irony of our film. We have no proof, none! But at the same time, everything we say is documented. Every single fact, every date, is accurate – and it’s always troubling. Someone might say: 'OK the facts are all good - but the way you put things together is just mere speculation, it's just coincidence' - well this is up for a debate of course. For us, these are not coincidences.

LR: What about the connection between Sibel Edmonds and Valerie Plame - what can you tell us about that?

MV: Apart from the complexities of these matters, we have something wonderful here: a PATTERN! Richard Barlow knows too much about nuclear stuff. Hadley goes after him. Plame knows too much about nuclear stuff. Grossman and Hadley go after her. Edmonds knows too much about nuclear stuff. Did Grossman, as some believe, go after her? Well.. anything is possible.

Marc Grossman and Steve Hadley! With these two guys, we’re not faraway from the Neocon little Mafia at the Pentagon, those people who called the shots about the war in Iraq, namely Perle and Feith. Feith and his infamous Office of Special Plans. The very place from which the latest big spy case involving Israel happened in 2005. I am speaking of the Lawrence Franklin case, an assistant to Feith arrested by the FBI for having leaked highly classified Pentagon documents describing U.S policy towards Iran and its nuclear intentions to the Israeli embassy, via his friends at AIPAC. The word 'nuclear' appears once again in this case!

Each time we have tried to decompartmentalize information, a global picture started emerging. Some observers believe that one of the reasons why the Americans and the Israelis cajoled Turkey in the 90s - beside the corruption and all that - was the perspective of being granted an airspace in the Anatolia highlands. It was seen as vitally important in the case of a military confrontation with Iran. Now, this is geopolitics, big time!

At the end of the day, you end up thinking ‘Put a Neocon on top of a nuclear case and you’ll always have a smoking gun! Same activities, same networks, same people, over the years. A bunch of maybe just ten guys. All Neocons, all longtime supporters of Israel and to a lesser extent of Turkey.

In Sibel’s case, as I said before, all roads start and end in Islamabad but we have stop overs in exotic places like Washington DC, the Balkans, Chechnya, South Africa, Israel, Dubaï, and more than often the Black Sea. And let me tell you, the Black Sea fish is hard to catch.

LR: So why do you think they went after Valerie Plame?

MV: Let me ask the question: did they go after Plame because she was investigating the American Turkish Council? That’s one tempting and plausible hypothesis! In any case, the chance that they went after her because of what she was doing at the CIA cannot be ruled out - for many reasons. Barlow’s case has shown that the U.S nuclear counterproliferation policy has been ‘sabotaged’ from the inside for decades now. History shows that whoever speaks out about these issues, whoever knows too much, shall be gagged. By the way, Barlow has also found the coïncidences between his case and the Plame case absolutely "remarkable".

Well now, thanks to whistle-blowers like Barlow, Edmonds, Cole, and patriots like Giraldi, Plame, or journalists like David Rose, Paul Sperry, Chris Deliso, the American public learns that some top U.S officials are indeed been involved in nuclear black market activities, probably to the benefit of the worst enemies of the American democracy.

Did you know that in the mid-90s Halliburton, then headed by Dick Cheney, was fined by the government for illegal dealings with Libya? Halliburton had sold equipment used for the drilling industry that could be of dual use: nuclear and non nuclear. Between 1990 to 2001, Rumsfeld, one of the Bush administration’s most strident “hardliners” on North Korea, was on the board of a Swiss firm, ABB. In 2000, ABB netted a $200 million contract with North Korea. The contract was to deliver equipment and services for two nuclear power stations. By the way, in the 1980s, Rumsfeld was busy selling U.S weapons to Saddam Hussein. They were filmed together in Iraq.

When we finished investigating, we noticed we had found nothing on Richard Armitage (laughs)…. Without him, the work looked unfinished (laughs)... As you may know, Armitage, who served at the Pentagon under Reagan, then as Deputy Secretary of State during President George W. Bush's first term, is known for his large circle of friends in the Pakistani military and ISI, as well as his connections to the Iran-Contra affair. Guess what? We recently learnt from the press that Armitage has admitted that he was among the sources of the leak of Valerie Plame!

I do believe their is more to dig about Brewster Jennings and Valerie Plame. One day, we will know the full story and we will see that Plame’s case was only connected say, one percent to Sibel‘s- but only a year ago, nobody thought that there was any connection at all. Well, after talking with David Albright, I am convinced there is at least one, and that is Turkey.

LR: Right - speaking of terrible consequences - you mentioned earlier that the first thing that you heard about Sibel 's case was that it had something to do with 911. What do you know about the connections between her case and 911?

MV: Some small things and some bigger things. The small things are more precise, and the larger issues are more diluted. From some private conversations with Sibel, it's our understanding that during her time at the FBI, she may have heard things, let’s say, about the existence of certain tapes related to Bin Laden. I won’t go into further details and quite frankly, as far as 9/11 goes, the event, and the preparation - that's all I know.

But there are other issues related to 9/11. First is WHY was 9/11 possible. Sibel’s story helps us find an answer…
__________________________________
NEXT UP: Sibel & 9/11… Friday or Saturday

update: see Part One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six

Israel-Turkey & Neocon nuclear agenda: KTM director interview - part 4

2006-10-17T20:52:00.000+10:00

This is part 4 of my interview with Mathieu Verboud, co-director of the film about Sibel Edmonds, Kill the Messenger.
(see Part One, Part Two and Part Three)

I'll cross-post at DU and DKOS - and hopefully get Sibel ('statesecrets') to join in the comments
----------------------------------------------------

The Israel-Turkey connection…

Mathieu Verboud: Turkey is interesting also because of its alliance with Israel. The Turkish military is highly connected to Israel military and Israeli weapons corporations. In the film, Giraldi explains the reasons for Israel and Turkey rapprochement back in the 80s. It is an alliance of major military and strategic importance for both countries. They signed a higly secret military agreement in 1996. When the Islamists came to power in Turkey in 1996, they could do anything but compromise the Israeli alliance. Each time they said that they wanted to do it in, Turkish Generals would go public the day afterward saying " Israel is a key ally - and we're going to continue the relationship". At the end of the 90s, all the Turkish top brass had traveled at least once to Israel and vice-versa. This is a very strong relationship. Turkey opened its airspace to the Israeli Air Force, and in particular the border zone with Syria, Iraq and Iran. In 1996 Perle, Feith and others, stressed Turkey’s strategic importance to Israel in their Clean Break paper, the infamous policy document they co-authored in favor of Israeli Prime Minister Neatanyahu, calling for all out war in the Middle east to save Israel.

From a Turkish perspective, There are lots of reasons for a rapprochement with Israel. It meant that Israel’s friends in the U.S, at the Pentagon, at the State Department or up on the Hill would then do anything for Turkey, including supplying weapons that could quench Ankara’s unsatiable thirst for weapons. To make things even ‘easier’, they used the services of know friends of Israel in the U.S : Stephen Solarz, Douglas Feith, Richard Perle.

And it worked! In the 1990s, Turkish generals received dozens of billions of dollars of free military assistance from the U.S. At the time, indifferent to the fact that Turkey’s brutal repression in Kurdistan had become a growing concern for the American public, major Jewish groups in the U.S lobbied ostensibly for the Turkish cause, basically claiming that "Turkey was a victim of terrorism, like Israel." Turkish generals were delighted.

What that tells you is that Turkey has an agenda and a real one. Turkey wants to be seen as a big player in the Greater Middle-East. Several countries in the region (Israel, Pakistan, Russia) have nuclear power or want to have nuclear power (Iran), and Turkey wants to be perceived as a possible candidate for the bomb as well.

Turkey has succeeded in doing something incredible. It is the only country in the world to have been offered a nuclear alliance by two supposedly ‘enemy countries’ - Pakistan and Israel. In 1998, when Pakistan detonated its first nuclear bomb, Pakistani officials called their Turkish counteparts and offered them to be under Pakistan's nuclear umbrella - which is no small matter. The Turks said 'well - thanks for the proposal'. A few years before that, perhaps around 1995, the Israelis had extended the same proposal to Turkey. Again, Turkish generals were delighted.

Turkey has played this pivotal role for a long time and those who know Turkey will tell you that this country is thriving with excellent strategists and diplomats. Getting close to Israel to get closer to the Pentagon was a smart and well-executed move. In Turkey, things are very often based on corruption and crime, but that's another story. Turkey always featured advantageously in spy stories. There was a James Bond film with a Turkish backdrop : From Russia with Love. Ankara has always been a hotbed of spies, for example during the Second World War… There was this 1952 film, 'Five Fingers', an American film classic by Joseph L. Mankiewicz, featuring Goering’s agents spying on the U.K thanks to a traitor at the British embassy. And all those spies met each other in Ankara’s cocktail parties - it was amazing!

Luke Ryland: Ok. And Turkey already has a nuclear program, correct?

MV: To my understanding, Turkey has a civil nuclear program today – but clearly has no intention (no serious intention, according to what I read on the web anyway) to have a nuclear weapon. But diplomacy is not about having, or not having, a nuclear weapon - diplomacy is about postures, strategic moves and attitudes. Turkey wants to be seen as a country that could decide to have the bomb if they wanted to.

In diplomatic terms, this is major, because having the bomb means your status changes. Besides harbouring jihadists, Pakistan has a nuclear bomb, and that’s status! Geopolitical perceptions of Pakistan are forever changed now because of that combination: the bomb + Bin Laden. It's not the same country as it was in the 1970s, when nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan had not yet imagined he could become the father of the Pakistani bomb. Turkey knows what status is. So Turkey’s message is ‘ We too can play rough. and we can go for the bomb too'.

Keep in mind these words from Seymour Hersh in his book 'The Samson Option: Israel's Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy': "the size and sophistication of Israel's nuclear arsenal allows men such as Ariel Sharon to dream of redrawing the map of the Middle East aided by the implicit threat of nuclear force."

LR: Ok - so which other American power brokers were helping AQ Khan?

MV: That is a key question and the little we know is already very disturbing. Many in the Reagan and the George HW Bush administration ‘protected’ the Pakistani nuclear connection!

Watch the film Atomwaffen für Al-Qaeda (Nuclear weapons for Al-Qaeda) by German director Egmond Koch. Everything is documented…

The Neocon nuclear agenda

MV: Koch tells CIA whistle-blower Richard Barlow's story and Pakistani nuclear scientist AQ Khan's story. Barlow was a brilliant CIA officer who knew almost everything about Pakistan’s nuclear program. For that reason, he was deposed by Congress in the mid–80s and, just like Sibel, the Republican administration crushed him because he told the truth during the hearings: he told Congress that Pakistan had the bomb and the U.S had never done anything really to stop it...

In 1989, and I am quoting Seymour Hersh here : "Barlow was forced to resign, under threat of firing, in what he alleges was retaliation for his persistent investigations into nuclear smuggling and his heated objections to yet another misleading congressional briefing on Pakistan."

Koch’s film confirms that. Every year, despite CIA reports highlighting Pakistan‘s progress towards the bomb, President Reagan used to sign a false waiver certifying that 'Pakistan doesn’t have the bomb.' Reagan lied for legal reasons (international law imposes tight import-export control on countries engaging in nuclear proliferation) and also for geopolitical reasons (public exposure of Pakistan’s efforts and U.S knowledge of it would have had dire consequences on U.S Congress funding for the CIA’s secret war against the Soviets in Afghanistan).

So Ronald Reagan was lying, and of course, everyone in charge knew that. At the time, one official was highly instrumental in making sure that the U.S complacency towards the Pakistani nuclear effort would never be exposed, and that man was Stephen Hadley. Hadley is the paramount example of the incestuous relations between the military industrial complex and the Executive Branch. Look at what you can read about him on his profile at Right Web that documents, with utter precision I have to say, the profile of prominent Neocons.

Quote : "Starting as a policy analyst for the DOD in 1972 during the first Nixon administration, Hadley has steadily moved up the ladder in the national security community. On the corporate side of the military-industrial complex, Hadley was a partner in a major DC law firm representing major defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin and Boeing." In passing, these two companies are board members of the American-Turkish Council.

Continuation of quote : "Also, outside government, he became affiliated with two policy institutes advocating hawkish positions in U.S. policy and international relations. Before becoming Rice’s top assistant, Hadley has held a variety of positions in the Defense Department and National Security Council. During the administration of George H.W. Bush, Hadley served under DOD Secretary as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy with responsibility for security policy toward NATO and Western Europe, on nuclear weapons and ballistic missile defense, and arms control."

It didn’t take long for Barlow to discover that Hadley had called the shots in his case. He decided to depose Hadley in his court case, but it was eventually in vain. Almost 20 years later, we learn that Hadley is a key part of the Valerie Plame leak. How surprising is this?

Today Hadley is National Security Advisor, Valerie Plame has lost her job and Barlow lives in a van driving the roads of West America…

LR: Moving on. I know that you interviewed Marc Grossman and that you cut it out of the film - can you talk about the interview at all?

MV: Knowing the players in the game, and knowing the business that they engage in, and this being a small world, and Grossman having served long years in Turkey and Pakistan, having served for NATO, having also met with ISI chief (Pakistani intelligence service) on a much-hyped but still mysterious meeting in the morning of September 11, at the time of the attacks, Grossman being a pillar of the ATC, so on and so forth, one could assume that this man would not be far away from those dealings - legal or illegal, it doesn’t matter!

Some observers presume he was on Sibel’s wiretaps, possibly tipping off Turkish friends about… let’s say… the risk posed to them by Brewster Jennings, the company CIA officer Valerie Plame used as a cover.
----------------------------

dailykos thread
DU thread

NEXT UP : Valerie Plame and Sibel Edmonds … wednesday or thursday

update: see Part One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six

Sibel Edmonds' Corrupt Boss is STILL the key to National Security

2006-10-17T10:59:00.000+10:00

I have a new post over at wotisitgood4 about the fact that Sibel's corrupt boss at the FBI translation unit is now basically the only gatekeeper between the FBI agents and all Arabic speaking terrorists.

Kill The Messenger Reviews

2006-10-15T10:21:00.000+10:00

Here are some reviews of Kill The Messenger from the French press. Most reviews have been translated from the French original by babelfish with an assist by me - which has resulted in some clunkiness.

Le Figaro.

“a woman to cut down” - the true story of a woman recruited by the FBI after September 11 then sanctioned for her uprightness.

Perhaps the Public imagined that with the Children of Tranquility Bay (film on a center for young difficult Americans, rewarded in Fipa), programmed last May on France 2, Mathieu Verboud and Jean-Robert Vialley had reached a peak in the originality of the writing. But the public didn't count on this new investigation worthy of the best whodunnit by John Grisham…

The difference is that this is a true story. That of Sibel Edmonds, called “the most explosive woman of September 11”, an involuntary detonator of a politico-legal explosive business.

“It is while working on the phenomenon of “Whistle Blowers”, these employees who denounce the illegal intrigues their incredible owners and stories (Enron, pharmaceutical laboratories…), that we could come into contact with it”, tells Mathieu Verboud.

Shortly after September 11, this American born in Iran and having grown up in Turkey, who speaks Persan, Azeri and Turkish, is recruited by the FBI to translate kilometers of phone-tappings. Corruption, drugs, money laundering, companies screens, nuclear black market… what she will discover is amazing. But when spies infiltrated within the department of translation try to recruit her, she decides to inform her bosses. It is there that her life gets rocked…

Attempt at intimidation, reprisals, Sibel Edmonds is finally laid off… She turns to the Congress, then towards the Dept of Justice, but the Bush Administration chooses to muzzle this too-awkward witness, “to kill the messenger” like one says to the FBI, by exhuming an old law: the “secret States' privilege”. In short: Silence or the prison. Why? To hide what?

The Pitiless Microcosm of Washington

The business could have stopped there. But this is just the beginning for the small translator, flag-carrier for “whistle blowers”, a long struggle which the film-makers capture. A crusade for the right to the truth. And for the public, a diving haletante (?) in the twists and turns of the espionage. “When a woman leaves in war, she is never innocent" continues Mathieu Verboud. If a whistle blower can cause an earthquake, imagine when it is about September 11. It was thought that she knew an enormous secret. But the objective was also to show how the world of information had managed the terrorist attacks, the political pressures and the incompetence of the bureaucracy. ”

A work of really good investigation which required ninety days of filming and which took on board the film-makers during six months in the life of this “woman to be cut down”: "She authorized us to follow it all the more easily - as the press did not support her. She uses her public image like a strategy. But she gave us total freedom - so long as we did not ask about her specific secret.”

Their film thus points the failures of the internal investigations of the FBI, the hazardous methods, the flip-flopping, lies of the heartless microcosm of Washington, fully supported with testimonies, official speeches and recorded footage. Thus they follow senior officials, federal employees, intelligence agents (FBI, the CIA, NSA) who did not hesitate to come forward: “They needed to speak. In the information also, there are honest people. I wanted to show that the political power was certainly instrumental, but never the State had handled them as much”, insists Verboud.

The camera tracking faces, expressions, faintnesses. The result is the height of the ambition. Their accounts, pure and hard, are so rich in revelations and leaves the audience, incredulous, flabbergasted or disgusted, and will have the feeling of watching a psychological thriller which mixes suspense and reflexion. Just some lengths will be reproached. It certainly is a complex business.

This documentary which could have been only one investigation into how the Bush Administration defies national security, goes well beyond.

Putting in prospect the strange bonds between the American politicians, Turkey, Israel, Pakistan, diplomats, secret service, multinational weapons procurement, nuclear programs - léaire (?), this film casts an unexpected light on the global environment and the crisis in the Middle East."

Le Monde.

The history of Sibel Edmonds could be used to make a John Grisham 'whodunnit.' A few days after the attacks of September 11, the young woman of Turkish extraction is recruited by the FBI. She is in charge of the translation of the phone-tappings, the interrogations and the documents within the framework of the antiterrorist fight. Sibel Edmonds speaks Persian, Farsi and Azeri.

In December of the same year, she is contacted by a colleague from the FBI who tries to recruit her for the account of a mysterious Turkish lobbying organization. By denouncing this manifest case of espionage and by revealing that the FBI hides information over September 11, Sibel Edmonds found herself at the heart of the incredible business of State.

After the Children of Tranquility Bay, a beautiful documentary on the American camps of behavior modification, the film-makers Mathieu Verboud and Jean-Robert Viallet have made a film full with suspense and revelations about these men and these women - the "whistleblower" ("those who blow a whistle") - which denounce the dysfunctions of an organization or an administration. An attractive diving (?), sometimes a little difficult, in the mysteries of the reason of State in America.

AP (france)

The much-awaited documentary "Kill The Messenger" is showing Tuesday on Canal+. Mathieu (Verboud) and Jean-Robert Viallet met Sibel Edmonds whose life was transformed into nightmare after her ousting from the FBI. In a 84 minute film, they deliver the impressive testimony of Sibel Edmonds.

The young woman is 32 years old when she is recruited by the FBI as a translator, four days after September 11, 2001. She is charged with translating wiretapped conversations, some related to the 9/11 attacks. Sibel Edmonds was born in Teheran from Turkish parents, and spent the first 18 years of her life in Teheran and in Turkey, before landing in the U.S and marrying an American.

But her world gets turned upside-down when she discovers that a colleague is involved with illegal activities implicating Turkish officials. The filmmakers report the rest of Sibel's story. She reports the incident to her superiors and gets fired from the FBI. After her firing, she goes to the U.S Congress. Months pass and Sibel Edmonds realizes that nobody makes the slightest move. The young woman tells her story to the media. Time has come for Attorney General John Ashcroft to classify the whole Sibel Edmonds case as a"State Secret." If the young translator continues to speak, she'll go to prison. Determined, yet powerless, Sibel Edmonds suffers two years of loneliness.

In 2003, the Bush government accepts the creation of a commission whose role is to investigate the government and intelligence failures that led to 9/11. Sibel Edmonds then will carry out a long battle in order to expose her case: Turkish spies infiltrated the FBI and the government is apparently aware of these spies. July 24, 2004, the 9/11 Commission Report comes out, but Sibel's testimony is not included. The young woman is regarded as a "whistle-blower", she is joined in her fight by intelligence agents from the FBI, the CIA and NSA. The two filmmakers find leads pointing to the role of Turkey, Israel and Pakistan. In the 80's, at the time of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S and Turkey were instrumental in helping Pakistan acquire nuclear power. Turkey appears to have acted as a back-door conduit for some of those
operations. Later on, Israel came into play, too. At the time, the CIA knew everything but turned a blind eye, even when Pakistan started selling its technology to friendly countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya. By then, nuclear proliferation had gone out of control and the U.S let it go. In the 90's, when the Talibans were in power in Afghanistan, some nuclear equipment even landed in the hands of Usama Bin Laden.

In addition, American-Turkish Council (ATC), a powerful American lobby, has for many years facilitated trade of the weapons with the assistance of Israel. And it is in an indirect way that Sibel Edmonds denounces the secrets of these diplomats and secret agents with her superiors. In spite of this, the young translator finds herself entangled in a spy case whose ramifications are beyond the knowledge of the young woman and the TV viewer at the same time. Besides being thorough, the investigation is captivating and alarming. Sibel's case is so complex that it look like a labyrinth without exit.

Armenews

"Film on Canal+ Don't miss - based on Vanity Fair's investigation - Sibel EDMONDS/FBI, Turk-English translator who translated the communications between the Speaker of the House and Turkish officials to receive bribes in order not to allow the resolution of the genocide to Congress in 2000

The life of Sibel Edmonds took a nightmarish turn when she was fired for mysterious reasons. Young translator having joined the FBI after September 11, she was sanctioned for her uprightness. Indeed, it discovered that one of her colleagues covered illegal activities of Turkish and American officials . She immediately informed her superiors of them. Their answer was to fire her. But the young woman decided to inform the media. Having allowed the cameras of Mathieu Verboud and Jean-Robert Viallet to follow her in her search for truth, she defies the FBI today.

The muzzled truth

A WOMAN TO BE CUT DOWN is a true espionage thriller on the only American citizen who dared to defy the F.B.I so that the truth bursts, and to ensure the Americans the safety that their government owes them.

“This real-life Whodunnit” is especially the history of Sibel Edmonds and her combat: how a translator, link of the complex chains of American information, discovers wiretaps blaming officials from America her allies. How it will defy those which threaten it, to overcome its fears and to defend the freedom which justifies its work for the country. And how, in the name of this same principle, the American authorities will prevent Sibel from speaking.

There is a true phenomenon around the translator, who has broad public support. Last April, Sibel Edmonds received from Paul Newman the “2006 First Amendment Award”, eminent distinction decreed by the PEN Club, an association in support of writers and the freedom of expression.

Revealed secrets

The work of the film-makers, at Sibel's side, explores the stakes of secrecy, was since the first day blocked by the State which justifies the threats against the young woman. Since September 11, 2001, the safety of the United States however allows innumerable distortions to the sacro-sanct personal freedoms. But higher interests seem to dictate the policy of the Bush administration…

Agents of the American Intelligence Community nevertheless “remain patriots” who validated the investigations of Mathieu Verboud. Those carry out in Turkey, Israel and to Pakistan, in the slides of the ministries for Justice and the Foreign Affairs, the F.B.I and the Pentagon. They join other significant businesses and mix business with weapons, technological espionage, nuclear black market, heroin traffic, money laundering, corruption - in particular with the American Congress - and serious threats, directly relating to national security.

A captivating and alarming investigation."

L'Humanite

"“To always deny, always hide”. This is the currency of the American secret service. Sibel Edmonds learned to her costs.

Recall the facts. Only two months after having been employed by the FBI translation department, this woman of Turco-Iranian origin will be approached by Turkish spies within the service. After having referred about it to her superiors, she is laid off without explanation, and decides to attack in justice the FBI.

In vain, her lawsuit is rejected without reason and the Minister for Justice issues the secrecy of State on the business, thus prohibiting her from speaking about her discoveries. This documentary with the simple but effective realization plunges us in the slides of the administration Bush and it is far from being reassuring!"

L'Express

"Who? Shortly after September 11, Sibel Edmonds, American of Turkish origin, is approached by the FBI to become translator in one of the most secret units. Patriotically, she accepts the job.

What? Quickly, the film demonstrates the presence of spies in the pocket of Turkish lobbies. It tells of the hierarchy, which dismisses her whole case. Sibel tries to warn the Congress, then justice, of her discoveries. But Justice Minister John Ashcroft stamps her entire case with "States Secrets"

Why? Mathieu Verboud and Jean-Robert Viallet reveal, in a palpitating investigation, the combat of this young woman against the FBI initially, then against the American authorities, whose lies hide behind the sacro-holy safety of the State"

Libération

Sibel Edmonds is 32 years old when she is contacted for the first time by the FBI, a few days after September 11, 2001. Like numerous other translators, this American, usually speaking Turkish and the Persian language, is committed to make up for lost time of the American information to decipher thousands of hours of phone-tappings.

A few weeks later, Sibel translates sulfurous conversations about money laundering, trafficking of weapons and drug, and corruption implicating American, Turkish and Israeli political personalities... Two months later, Sibel is approached by one of her translator colleagues and her husband. They propose to her, without ambiguity, a financial arrangement if she does not transmit all information which she translates. Informing her bosses at once, Sibel Edmonds enters an infernal process which lasts nearly five years. Because all her direct higher interlocutors and direction of the FBI order her to keep silent. And when she alerts the Department of Justice, she is immediately fired from the FBI and is formally prohibited from speaking. This extremely rare procedure, Secret State Privilege, obliges her to keep her silence, even in front of a judge, in the name of the secrecy of State.

The documentary clearly aims at presenting Sibel Edmonds like an angry, passionate American. The title says it all, since her combat becomes extensive since she created a coalition of "whistle blowers", a term indicating those which denounce the dysfunctions of the State, she gathers a hundred former members of the FBI, NSA, the CIA and Justice...

It is difficult to really understand why Sibel is silenced: the deep lack of curiousity of the American agencies about counter-espionage or a corruption installed at the most top of the State? One can only choose.

also - some emails from viewers

I need to know what Sibel Edmonds knows

2006-10-12T18:47:00.000+10:00

Gary Hood has a song called "Sibel Edmonds" which is included on the soundtrack to the movie. You can see them perform it live on youtube

"Don't tell me its just the way that it goes

I need to know what Sibel Edmonds knows.

And so do you."

Perle’s World

2006-10-12T15:20:00.000+10:00

This is Part Three (see Part One, and Part Two) of the extended interview I did with Mathieu Verboud, Co-Director of Kill The Messenger.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perle’s World

Mathieu Verboud: Sibel’s case fits in a bigger picture and this picture is ghastly! And the more we learnt about her case, the more it ‘synchronised’ with the bigger picture. It is terrifying! We are not facing a smoking gun but a smoking ‘bomb’, if such an expression exists! And Sibel is the detonator.

But she has enemies. Enemies she can’t name, or only by saying "U.S officials"

These officials are no ordinary people. Their story is not limited to their connection to Sibel, far far from it! First, for decades now, they have been open agents of influence for the state of Israel. On many occasions, both Perle and Feith (not to mention their like-minded friends Harold Rhode, Michael Ledeen, Stephen Bryen) have been investigated by the FBI for passing secret information to Israeli officials. And none of what I tell you is secret, it’s been public record for… what… over three decades! The FBI started wiretapping Perle in 1970… Feith got caught in 1982.

How often did we hear, when talking to people about Perle and Feith, that besides their blind allegiance to the cause of the Israeli settlers, these two guys are in it for the money? Constantly.

They have a long story that goes far beyond the scope of this discussion. But their most significant feature is of course their vision of international relations. They always call for unbridled use of war to clear a path for U.S interests. At all cost. At all times. All targets are welcome: Syria, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, why not France… Feith is the first high-ranking official in U.S history to have systematically opposed all kind of arms control. All in the name of freedom! They don’t care if that means putting U.S national security at risk.

Perle and his clique have shaped, many now say ‘hijacked’, U.S foreign policy when they were in government but also when they were out of government. Under Clinton, many of these Necons were recruited by major U.S weapons corporations, which means they were never far from Pentagon policy makers. So these modern day ‘doctor Strangelove’ are amazingly powerful - to the point that this has become now a major concern even for traditional supporters of Israel in government agencies, like the Pentagon, the FBI or the CIA. The war in Iraq has been a catalyst for that, if not a wake up call. It's about time!

Someday, someone will write a book about Richard Perle’s story – One thing is sure: this man likes waging his own jihads using other people's blood. Very similar to the Iranian government, ready to fight Israel in Lebanon to the last drop of Lebanese blood - but never their own blood!

These people live in a world of proxy wars – a world where they control things from behind the scenes, but where no strings are attached to the deals they cut because they ultimately just put their influence on the line when others spill their blood, ultimately to make them richer and mightier.

Luke Ryland: These are the kind of people that Sibel has faced since September 2001. Do you have people in the film who talk specifically about them and their activities?

MV: Yes. In the film, we expand on these notions with ex-CIA officer Philip Giraldi, who recently wrote a very interesting article about Sibel. He has suspicions that Douglas Feith and Richard Perle may have helped, or been instrumental, in establishing false end-user-certificates that enabled weapons to be sent over to the Chechen guerillas - many of them being very closely linked to Al-Qaeda.

Of course, Giraldi touches also on Perle and Feith’s connections in Israel and Turkey, their links to Israeli and U.S defense contractors, including major ones (Feith was a consultant for Northrop Grumman), always playing both sides of the fence, dealing with a variety of dubious characters across the globe.

Those who know Sibel’s case will add Turkish generals, NATO officials, and most probably the Turkish mafia to this picture gallery.

This should not sound like a surprise. How many times did we find Neocon fingerprints on dirty policies with Central Asia, on this legendary Silk Road that has now become the Eldorado for jihad, US Army wargames, CIA’s secret prisons, oil, gas, weapons, heroin trade, arms trafficking, nuclear black market, high technology transfers, mafia activities…? All too often!

And Sibel’s enemies have such a direct access to policymakers that you wonder at times whether they are not part of a ‘shadow government’.

One example. In 2000, the newly-elected House Speaker Dennis Hastert (a man we know is involved in Sibel’s case for having allegedly accepted Turkish bribes in the late 90’s) needed a senior foreign policy adviser. Who got the job ? Nancy Dorn, a top lobbyist for the government of Azerbaijan (a ‘Turkic’ country). This created enormous embarrassment up on the Hill. A former Reagan and Bush administration official, Nancy Dorn had also represented the government of Pakistan as well as Hutchison Whampoa Ltd, a controversial Hong Kong company closely tied to Red China. Hutchinson Wampoa whose interests in Panama sparked a loud and nasty round of conservative hand-wringing about a Chinese attempt to take control of the Panama Canal! Hutchison Whampoa Ltd’s owner, Li Ka-Shing was a shareholder of the BCCI, a bank closed in 1991 after a $12-billion bankruptcy scandal. The BCCI, whose director was Saudi banker Khalid Bin Mahfouz, had funneled money to Islamist charities and also to the Pakistan’s nuclear program. By the way, Khalid Bin Mahfouz’s sister married Usama Bin Laden…

LR: Wow - Hastert, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, China, BCCI, Bin Laden, the Islamic bomb… !

MV: (laughs)… the story is not over. In 2003, Hutchison got interested in the buyout of Global Crossings, a U.S telecom giant and also a Pentagon contractor. Guess who Global Crossing retained as a consultant to help overcome the Pentagon’s resistance to the company's proposed sale to a Red China proxy? The then chairman of Pentagon’s advisory Defense Policy Board: Richard Perle himself.

OK, let’s add Perle to this funny picture…. the story is not over yet.

During the 90’s, Loral, a U.S manufacturer of satellite and military electronic systems, was under State Department and Pentagon scrutiny for leaks of embargoed technology to China…. At the time, space systems, satellites, missile technology, avionics were highly ‘sensitive’ stuff… and a major source of interest for Turkey (already a good client of Loral) and Israel, these two countries being, as you know, compulsive buyers of U.S hi-tech weaponry.

During that decade, the State Department, the CIA and the DIA had already compiled evidence that Israel had violated US export regulations by transferring missile, laser and aircraft technology to China, with official reports dating back the pattern to 1983! During the Gulf War in 1991, U.S troops found that Iraqi tanks were equipped with U.S technology illegally obtained by Israel, then sold to China who eventually sold it to the Iraqi.

Coming back to Loral. Who did Loral retain in 1998 then in 2001 to help settle its dispute with the Pentagon and the State Department? Douglas Feith, always an ardent supporter of ambitious missile defense systems, and Richard Perle.

Wherever they are, these people always end up in a situation of conflict of interest. When it too obvious that they look like the fox in a henhouse, they still have the possibility of planting their friends in the right spots.

LR: Like the Dickersons?

MV: (laughs)… Right! Let me give you an unbelievable example of that. In 2000, in the last months of the Clinton Administration, a panel was established by Congress in order to counter "back door" technology leaks to China. This ‘China Commission’ had already established Israel as a supplier to Beijing of radar systems, optical & telecom equipment, drones & flight simulators. OK, guess who was appointed in 2001 to this China Commission, with the support of Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz ? An ex-assistant to Richard Perle by the name of Stephen Bryen. Bryen was this ex Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffer who had to resign in 1979 after he was overheard in a DC hotel offering confidential documents to top Israeli military officials! Now guess who brought ‘Bryen the fox’ into the hen house by appointing him? Speaker Dennis Hastert!

This story is still not over!

Guess who else is a member of this China Commission? Michael Ledeen, a long-time friend of Perle and Feith! A man with an impeccable record! In an excellent article ("Serving two Flags" Counterpunch, February 2004), author Stephen Green states that Ledeen, hired by Perle in 1983 as a Pentagon consultant on terrorism, had his security clearances downgraded from Top Secret-SCI to Secret, after one of his bosses, Noel Koch, the Principal Assistant Secretary for International Security Affairs, had urged the FBI to investigate him for passing classified materials to a foreign country, believed to be Israel. Ledeen was also a key player in the Iran-Contra affair too. After 9/11, while Feith and Perle were pushing for war against Iraq, Ledeen was pushing for another simultaneous war against Iran. History repeats itself!

For some reason, many within this Neocon mafia are Jewish. And this, we have to say, raises all sorts of concerns. Mainly because these people’s behaviors help fuel a growing anti-Jewish sentiment everywhere in the world and that’s not good news. So much so that today many Israeli observers believe that the Neocons have become detrimental to Israel’s interests.

Again, there's a major piece of history to be written here and it so happens that Sibel Edmonds is entangled in this web. As Christopher Deliso says, Sibel by herself is a connecting dot to many things. She is the missing piece that helps assemble (or understand) almost the whole puzzle. We agree. She's amazing, and what she knows but cannot tell (because of the gag order on her) is amazing too!

LR: Her story is amazing, indeed. When I'm trying to understand this whole story, I struggle to get my head around which part of the story is ideological, if any, and which elements are about pure financial greed - particularly with respect to Israel, for example.

MV: Well, you’d better be talented if you are really greedy, because cash is not going to pop up like this. You have to make things work, you have to grease the machine. So, let’s say Richard Perle is extremely talented. He has always suceeded in preserving his private business interests, even when he was in government. He has his priorities straight. He is a good mechanic!

LR: Right - do you see that there's much ideology on the Turkish front? Or is the Turkey scenario just a useful platform to sell arms, or to move heroin etc?

MV: If we put together all the evidence we have in Sibel’s case, many roads lead to Turkey obviously – wiretaps targets are Turkish, those who wanted to recruit Sibel are linked to Turkish interests, U.S officials allegedly involved in arms trafficking are connected to Turkey, but the question is 'which Turkey?'

In Turkey, you have the army, the MIT (intelligence service), connected in countless ways with the warlords, the baba families (drug barons), the extreme right… you also have the Kurds. You have many players in Turkey! And all these people play with weapons, narcs, money.

I guess that in the case of Turkey, we should speak more of strategy than of ideology. Maybe selling arms, moving heroin are just means to an end, the end being maybe increased power or increased political leverage.

And this is where Israel comes in…
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NEXT UP: The Israel-Turkey connection…

update: see Part One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six

Sibel First Amedment cannonball

2006-10-11T07:31:00.000+10:00

Sibel has posted a new YouTube video about her winning the PEN/Newman’s Own First Amendment Award earlier this year. The transcript is below. Sibel makes as an appearance, as does Rep Carolyn Maloney, Ann Beeson (ACLU), Sen Frank Lautenberg, and Paul Newman

She's also posted PEN's press release announcing the award, and Sibel's acceptance speech is here. Here's a snippet:

Standing up to despotism and tyranny has always been considered illegal by those in power, and dangerous to those who would expose them. Today we are facing despots who use ‘national security’ to push everything under a blanket of secrecy; to gag and call it a privilege; to detain without having to show a cause; and to torture yet believe it’s fully justified.

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 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.

There was also a separate, informal, impromptu 10 minute 'speech' from the Award Breakfast here (10min, mp3) - I love this speech. It's very touching. You'll have to listen.

---------------------------------------

Here's the transcript of the PEN video:

Voiceover: Sibel Edmonds lives in suburban Washington and never expected to become, in the words of a Vanity Fair headline, "An Inconvenient Patriot.”

Rep Carolyn Maloney (D. NY): She is a modern day Paul Revere! She stood up and said "This is wrong." And they told her to shut-up and she just kept on talking. And they told her to shut-up again, and took away her security clearance, took away her job, and she still just kept on talking.

Sibel Edmonds: They have threatened me that they will put me in jail

Voiceover: Edmonds was born in Iran. One of her earlier memories: the Shah's secret police, SAVAK, searching her family's house in Tehran. Then, the Ayatollah Khomeini's revolution.

One time, Revolutionary Guards surrounded an eleven year old Sibel and told her she could go to jail because her headscarf was not modest enough. Her family fled to Turkey, Sibel ended up in college in Maryland. Her languages included English, Farsi, Turkish and Azerbaijani. After 911, Edmonds decided to go to the FBI. They did not have a single translator who could speak Turkish - she became a contract linguist, translating conversations, seized documents and wiretaps of foreign officials under suspicion.

Ann Beeson (ACLU): And she discovered, in fact, that there had been serious security breaches which could jeopardize the work, and jeopardize the investigation - and also in fact that there was a person that she was just convinced was a spy, from another country.

Voiceover: She told her boss. And her bosses boss. But nothing changed. Then further, the Justice Department, the Office of the Inspector General, and two senators on the Judiciary Committee. When action was taken, it was the FBI firing her. They said for her disruptive effect on the translating unit. She brought suit against the FBI for firing her. But the Department of Justice invoked the States Secrets Privilege - saying that hearing the case would jeopardize National Security. The case was dismissed. She never even got into court. The government retroactively classified briefings that Edmonds had made to Senators - yet she continued to speak out. Finally, the independent Office of the Inspector General - the OIG - investigated. Their report immediately classified by the FBI - but when an unclassified version was released it confirmed Sibel's story. Quote: "Many of her allegations had bases in fact. We believe the FBI did not take them seriously enough, and that her allegations were in fact the most significant factor in the FBI's decision to terminate her services." Even with that report, the appeal of her case was denied, so she took her case to the highest court in the land - the Supreme Court declined to hear it. Her reporters cite the ultimate irony - the hearing was denied the same day that a hunk of marble from the Supreme Court's facade fell to the pavement. But her cause is not over. The Paul Revere Freedom to Warn Act, and a similar Senate bill, to strengthen protection for government whistleblowers will now make it's way through Congress because of Sibel Edmonds' case.

Rep Carolyn Maloney (D. NY): She's a First Amendment cannonball. She speaks up for what she believes in. She's a leader. The fact that she, not only, was a strong advocate for her own case, but she became a strong advocate for the public policy, for the greater good.

Sen Frank Lautenberg (D, NJ): She had the intuition, the courage, and the backbone, to stand up and do it. And we are very grateful to her. And the PEN award is significant in that regard. Tell the public what happened - Sibel Edmonds was a heroine in this

Ann Beeson (ACLU): Sibel Edmonds is an American Patriot. She has a classic story to tell - which is the story of an immigrant, who came here seeking more freedom, and seeking a real democracy - and was unfortunately shut down when she tried to exercise her rights under the First Amendment.

Paul Newman: I'm Paul Newman. For the past fourteen years we've been honoring courageous Americans who have defended their First Amendment rights against overwhelming odds, and in so doing, affirmed the protection of the First Amendment for all of us. Sibel Edmonds adds lust re to this distinguished group of honorees with her refusal to backdown from her confrontation with the FBI. In his straight talking way, President Harry Truman said: Whenever one American, who has done nothing wrong, is forced by fear to shut his mouth, then all Americans are in peril. Sibel Edmonds would not let an intimidating FBI shut her mouth, and as a result, suffered grievous consequences, but she has persevered and we are better off for her sacrifices.

Voiceover: PEN American Center is pleased to present Sibel Edmonds with the 2006 Pen Newman's Own First Amendment Award.

crossposted at sibeledmonds.blogspot.com

U.S weapons for the Jihad

2006-10-10T11:07:00.000+10:00

This is Part Two (see Part One) of the extended interview I did with Mathieu Verboud, Co-Director of Kill The Messenger.

U.S Weapons for the Jihad

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mathieu Verboud: …. There is a great book by George Crile called "Charlie Wilson's War" which describes the situation at the time of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The story takes place in the early 1980’s, the time of the first dealings between a whole generation of right-wingers in power in Washington and the Islamic world. Dick Cheney was then Secretary of Defense with people like Steven Hadley and Perle under him, among others. Back then, U.S policy was clear: Pakistan was a vital ally in the war against the Soviet in Afghanistan. An ally that needed to be ‘preserved’ at all costs – have you read the book ?

Luke Ryland: No I haven't read the book - but I know a little about Charlie Wilson. He is now Pakistan's Number One lobbyist.

MV: At the time of 9/11, at least, he was. I guess he is retired now.

The book describes in great details the saga of this Texan congressman, an eccentric who decided to make a crusade out of helping the Afghan jihad against the Soviets. The first modern jihad. And Congressman Wilson had the means to his end. Since 1976, he was a key member of the House Appropriations Committee, a very select committee busy managing federal funds for Defense worth hundreds of billions of dollars! Because of his position, Wilson could start his own ‘parallel diplomacy’. He became personal friend to the Pakistani strong man : general Zia ul Haq. Wilson had also been a long-time supporter of Israel (he once described himself as an ‘Israeli commando’ in the U.S Congress) and soon became a personal friend of Zvi Rafiah, an Israeli embassy official Wilson himself thought was a Mossad agent.

An otherwise well-known pattern (back-door diplomacy) arises here and this is where the story start to connect to what we witness today in the backdrop of Sibel’s case.

Wilson probed the Israelis about his plans in Afghanistan, asking them if they would agree to devise anti-aircraft weapons for the Mujahideens. The Israelis agreed but what impressed the CIA the most at the time was that the Pakistanis quietly accepted the Israeli offer, saying: "OK. Allah sure has his own peculiar ways of helping us".

At the time, Pakistan was, as I said, a U.S ally but it was also a very strict Islamic country with nuclear ambitions. In the 80’s, Pakistan was flooded with U.S weapons for the jihad but it also organized the biggest nuclear proliferation network ever: the now famous AQ Khan network. The Saudis funded both programs : weapons for the jihad, and money for the nuclear buildup.

At the time, the idea of an 'Islamic Bomb' was a red flag in the U.S but not a big one. The hot-spot then was Nicaragua, and the Reagan administration was busy countering the devastating impact of the Iran Contra Gate, a scandal in many ways bigger than Watergate. All this helped ‘sanctuarize’ the Pakistan issue, meaning Pakistan was ‘untouchable’, if not a ‘holy’ cause.

Among other things, the book documents the fact that Israel was once willing to give military support to an Islamic country openly in quest of the ultimate weapon. And Israel played the Pakistani card early on. Again, this isn't just‘informal talk’ between enemies here, this is policy! A major policy decision! The Israelis were helping the Pakistanis!

Of course, the public is never informed nor aware of how dice roll behind the scene. At the end of the day, the U.S did fund the first modern jihad and did turn a blind eye to the Islamic Bomb, cajoling people who were later to attack them, in September 2001.

Afghan warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is a good example of that. Pakistan’s darling, this uncompromising fundamentalist was also a ruthless killer described by the Red Army as a depraved fanatic who used to skin captured Russians alive. According to the Afghans themsleves, Hekmatyar and his radical fundamentalist organization, Hezb-i-Islami, were also busy assassinating moderate Afghans. Jihad through terror. Jihad for power! In 1990, Hekmatyar, the largest recipient of CIA weapons during the Afghan war, turned his back on the U.S and publicly condoned Iraq’s invasion of Kuwaitt. In the aftermath of 9/11, the CIA even launched a satellite-guided missile in a attempt to kill him as part of the war on terror. In this case, and many others, the lesson is clear: the CIA had backed (and equipped) the wrong horse!

This U.S-Pakistan alliance in the 1980s was just a disaster waiting to happen. Throughout the 80’s, Pakistan feared that the minute the Soviets left Kabul, the U.S would abandon Pakistan in their confrontation with India. From their own perspective, this was not just a paranoid assumption. They knew all too well history and the natural arrogance of a superpower towards ‘client states’, particularly where they are not useful any more. And their prophecy proved correct…

With the Russians gone, sanctions were soon imposed by the U.S on Pakistan and all military and economic assistance was cut off. In 1990, a nuclear war was avoided at the very last minute between Pakistan and India (CIA itself said this was far bigger a crisis than the missile crisis in Cuba back in the 60’s). During this crisis, the U.S took a neutral stance, which was a wise decision by the way, but for the Pakistanis, it was all too obvious, Washington was not a reliable ally anymore. Later on, the Clinton administration placed Pakistan on the list of state sponsors of terrorism for its support of Kashmiri freedom fighters. In the Pakistani military, resentment towards the U.S went over the top. Afghan warlords went along with them. The ‘American friends’ had become the enemy.

Ungrateful? In a way! The CIA secret war in Afghanistan has been the biggest covert operation ever mounted by the agency. They started in 1980 with 5 miserable million dollars and ended up with 1,2 billions dollars (Saudi Arabia paying half of it) some six, seven years later! The CIA had never witnessed anything like this. The irony is that because the CIA operations with Pakistan wereclandestine, the Afghans never knew the weapons they used were shipped from the U.S. To the Afghans, as George Crile writes, "the miracle victory against the Soviets was all the work of Allah." Crile adds: "Having brought down one superpower, they could just as easily take on another."

LR: But there were still links between Americans and Pakistan, right?

MV: You’re right. Experts on terrorism would agree that yes, there was indeed a shift in U.S policy regarding Pakistan in the 90’s because of its support of jihad… but, and this is a major ‘but’ here… the shift was at least 'ambiguous'. Because of its oil interests in Central Asia, the U.S still had to cajole Pakistan in a way. So again, Washington turned a blind eye this time to the rise of the Taliban (a Pakistani creation) and its alliance with the emerging jihadist network, Al-Qaeda, a group which enjoyed support from some good friends of the U.S : Saudi Arabia.

In other words, the U.S could (and should!) have done more against the Islamic threat in the 90’s but for the fundamentalists in Pakistan, the little they did was already too much to bear. The U.S fell into the classic double bind: whatever they did, Pakistan would feel betrayed. The road to 9/11 was opened…

Let’s never forget that many of the 9/11 conspirators spent time in Pakistan and Afghanistan… Let's not forget either that Pakistan has helped Iran’s nuclear program since 1987!

OK now that we’ve found the smoking gun that lead to the attacks on the U.S, what’s the connection to Sibel ? Well, there’s one and it is big…

The Turkish side of the story…

MV: Well first, without 9/11, Sibel would not have been hired by the FBI. She would not have found out about ‘certain’ things. Things that we more or less understand now, because of her fight. And what we understand is that these ‘certain’ things have some connections with the smoking gun I just mentioned. In the dangerous games that led to 9/11, you don’t only find bearded jihadists confronting the U.S, you also find many ‘other players’ : allied countries, foreign military establishments or institutions like NATO, business interests, and all of this produces its fair share of unexpected alliances and criminal activities. This is the legacy of the Sibel Edmonds case for the historians who try to understand the ‘why and how’ of the biggest ever terrorist operation that was 9/11.

And obviously, the first ‘other player’ we found while investigating Sibel’s case was Turkey. What we bring in the film is the ‘Turkish side’ to the story. To be very clear, the ‘Turkish side’ is Turkey’s involvement in nuclear black market, as one of many factors that led to 9/11. And Turkey’s involvement in nuclear black market, as a reason for these FBI investigations to which Sibel was associated as a language specialist for the FBI.

LR: OK, how much do we know about Turkey’s involvement in nuclear black market

MV: Well… Turkey helped the Pakistani nuclear program since the very beginning. That’s not very well known. AQ Khan’s efforts were made possible because of the U.S but also because of Turkey, a NATO ally. Nuclear proliferation experts like David Albright, Joe Trento and Dave Armstrong testify to that in the film.

A 1997 report by the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility (www.ccnr.org) indicates that the first allegation of a Turkey/Pakistan nuclear connection was in 1981. At first, it started small. The US administration protested a $30,000 shipment of "inverters" from a Turkish textiles firm to Pakistan, allegedly for use in the Pakistani uranium enrichment program. Relations between Turkey and Pakistan became increasingly close after the military coup in Turkey in 1980. Turkish President/General Kenan Evren, and Pakistani President/General Zia ul-Haq exchanged a series of official visits that only ended with Zia's 1988 death in a plane crash.

Concerns about Turkey's potential involvement in nuclear weapons proliferation continued in the 1990’s. In 1992, Senator John Glenn and other US congressmen accused Turkey of supplying sensitive technology to Pakistan in order to aid in that country's acquisition of uranium enrichment technology. In 1995, the Greek government repeated concerns about "nuclear cooperation between Ankara and Islamabad... and reports that Turkey might try to acquire nuclear weapons material and technology and recruit nuclear scientists from the Muslim republics of the former Soviet Union."

Of course, others players helped Pakistan : China, Saudi Arabia, Libya, but these are not NATO allies. European go-betweens played a major role too in the Pakistani procurement program. Firms in South East Asia contributed high-tech equipment to the enterprise, in some cases without knowing it. As the outgoing network grew, Dubaï became a hub for the network’s operations. Throughout that period, Turkey and South Africa served as intermediate trans-shipping points for items acquired from the United States. Turkey has its share of crooked intermediaries too. In 2004, after the first international police raid on the AQ Khan network, several Turkish businessmen were arrested for aiding Pakistan and selling dual-use goods to Libya. They manufactured components needed in the gas centrifuge uranium enrichment process, in particular electronic components for him. These people were old acquaintances of AQ Khan. Their illegal business had been going on for years.

LR: OK, now that we know that two NATO members (the U.S and Turkey) helped Pakistan in this critical period (the 80’s and, in the case of Turkey, the 90’s), were Turkey and the US working together here? Is that where Sibel comes in?

MV: Well, it happens that, back in the 80’s, some of the Reaganites mentioned earlier had strong connections in Turkey, most notably Richard Perle and Douglas Feith. At the time, Perle was Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy, a job that dealt with nuclear weapons issues worldwide, and the monitoring of U.S. defense technology exports. Perle hired a ‘newcomer’ - Doug Feith, a guy just six years out of law school with only two years of experience in defense issues. Both men left the Pentagon at the end of the 80’s but returned in office after George W. Bush got elected.

OK, now what kind of 'Turkish connections' did these individuals have in the 80s? Well, we know almost nothing but the little we knew sounds odd. Let me quote a March 2003 article by Jeff Koopersmith in the American Politics Journal called "Dead Man Walking": "After his stretch with President Reagan, Perle became a highly paid lobbyist for Turkey and, working alongside Israel, purportedly killed a Senate resolution in 1989 blaming Turkey for the Armenian Genocide." Exactly the same kind of situation we had in 2000, when the Turkish lobby in the U.S managed to get a similar resolution killed again, thanks to Bill Clinton and House Speaker Dennis Hastert. In Hastert's case, the FBI has wiretaps pointing to bribery - What happened in 1989? Did we have the same situation? I don’t know.

This is a big picture. But what’s the connection to Sibel ? Is there any overlap ?

Well, (laughs)… what do you find when investigating Sibel’s case ? Nuclear black market, Turkish officials connected to high U.S officials, some at the Pentagon, others at the State Department or up on Capitol Hill.

LR: It does sound familiar!

MV: Of course. And what does it tell us ? Well it does tell us something : Sibel’s case fits in a bigger picture and this picture is ghastly ! And the more we learnt about her case, the more it ‘synchronised’ with the bigger picture. It is terrifying! We are not facing a smoking gun but a smoking ‘bomb’, if such an expression exists! And Sibel is the detonator.

But she has enemies. Enemies she can’t name, or only by saying "U.S officials"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEXT UP: Perle’s world…
update: see Part One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six

Sibel Edmonds and Borat?

2006-10-06T16:45:00.000+10:00

With any luck, Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev's meetings with George Bush this past week, and Borat's new "moviefilm" Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan, might help put the spotlight on the part of the world that Sibel talks about.

This is from Sibel's interview with Scott Horton, August 05:

SE: I started working three days after Sept. 11 with a lot of documents and wiretaps that I was translating. Some of them dated back to 1997, 1998. Even after Sept. 11, covering up these investigations and not pursuing some of these investigations because the Department of State says, "You know what, you can't pursue this because that may deal with this particular country. If this country that the investigation deals with are not one of the Axis of Evil, we don't want to pursue them." The American people have the right to know this. They are giving this grand illusion that there are some investigations, but there are none. You know, they are coming down on these charities as the finance of al-Qaeda. Well, if you were to talk about the financing of al-Qaeda, a very small percentage comes from these charity foundations. The vast majority of their financing comes from narcotics. Look, we had 4 to 6 percent of the narcotics coming from the East, coming from Pakistan, coming from Afghanistan via the Balkans to the United States. Today, three or four years after Sept. 11, that has reached over 15 percent. How is it getting here? Who are getting the proceedings from those big narcotics?

SH: ...Now listen, when you talk about the State Department cites diplomatic ties to foreign countries they would prefer not be stepped on. I'm sorry, but the word "Israel" is just screaming inside of my head here. I guess you can't give me any indication "yes" or "no" if that's what you're talking about?

SE: Well, one of the interesting things about the Vanity Fair article… I don't know how many people picked up on that. But they're saying 'Turkic countries'. It's plural people. And to say OK, we're looking at this region of the world that nobody is referring to [in] the War Against Terror.

OK, you're looking at Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, and these are the countries that now we are busy establishing (military) bases in. And a large portion of their GDP depends on narcotics, and there is a huge al-Qaeda presence in their countries. We don't hear anything about Balkan countries, and again, their direct ties and direct relevance to al-Qaeda. They are not even naming these countries. The role that Pakistan played before and the role that Pakistan is playing today. So, as I have said before, there are several countries, there are several organizations, and you can't just isolate one country or one organization.

Here's Ted Rall this past week:

"George W. Bush says lots of nice things about President Nursultan Nazarbayev. On September 29 he portrayed the leader of Kazakhstan, who came to Washington for a state luncheon, as a "steadfast partner in the international war on terrorism." Nazarbayev, according to Bush and U.S. state-controlled media, is leading a transition to democracy and liberalizing his nation's economy. He's been lauded for privatizing old Soviet-era state industries and inviting foreign companies to invest in the exploitation of what may be the world's largest untapped oil reserves. Kazakhstan, Bush says, "now is a free nation."

It depends on what your definition of "free" is.

Considering that his Central Asian neighbors are ruled by megalomaniacal despots (Turkmenistan) and mass murderers (Uzbekistan), or disintegrating into anarchy and civil strife (Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan), President Nazarbayev's regime appears relatively benign. But he's merely the best of a bad lot.
[]
Kazakhstan's geopolitical importance is obvious. It is the largest producer of Caspian Sea oil, borders Russia, China and the other Central Asian states, and has granted the U.S. Air Force landing rights at Almaty's airport for operations in Afghanistan. Moreover, it's a rare "friendly" country in the Muslim world: Kazakhstan is the only Central Asian republic to have sent troops to Iraq.

In all the ways that matter, however, Nazarbayev presides over a police state that is indistinguishable from his more notorious neighbors, such as Islam Karimov, president of Uzbekistan."

And here's Ken Silverstein at Harpers last week talking about the same meeting:

"While the agenda for his meeting with President Bush has not been published, there are a few topics they're likely to avoid. One is corruption—a delicate subject given that, this coming January, American prosecutors will be in court seeking to prove that James Giffen, a former consultant to Nazarbayev, funneled $78 million in oil kickbacks to the president on behalf of American oil companies.

There's also the question of democratization. Nazarbayev has severely restricted (and in some cases evicted) American groups charged with promoting political reform. Yesterday Senator Russell Feingold noted that the Bush Administration has kept very quiet about the invitation it extended to Nazarbayev. “I don't blame them,” he explained. “President Bush has said that his goal is to spread democracy and the rule of law around the world. But this goal is hard to reconcile with his support for one of the world's most repressive and corrupt dictatorships.”
[]
That's business as usual in Kazakhstan—and playing host to this sort of dictator, it turns out, is business as usual at the White House."

Alternatively, if you'd like an unbiased view, here's Kazakhstan's ambassador to the United Kingdom:

"Kazakhstan is in reality an increasingly modern, prosperous secular state. Although the population is predominantly Muslim, we have many synagogues, not to mention churches of several denominations. Kazakhstan has a small but thriving Jewish community. The chief rabbi of Israel, John Metzger, has praised my country for its tradition of openness and tolerance. So indeed did Pope John Paul II during his visit in 2001.

Why has (Borat) Baron Cohen chosen Kazakhstan as the vehicle for his comic talents? Kazakhstan is the size of western Europe. Far from being a backwater, it is set to become one of the top five oil producers in the next decade; in the past six years it has had an annual growth rate of about 10% and, over the past three years, the proportion of those living below the poverty line has fallen from 25% to 16%. There is growing appreciation of Kazakhstan's importance in the fight against terrorism and of its role as regional economic and political pace-setter.
[]
Nor does Kazakhstan have the advantages of a well-connected diaspora to defend its interests in the same way as Israelis, Palestinians or Armenians. Again, Baron Cohen could have caricatured a powerful developing country - like Turkey, Brazil or India - but there would have been sharp reactions, perhaps even at a political level."

For more on Uzbekistan, for example, see Juan Cole's recent article after a speech by former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray.

Borat, of course, has his acerbic knife pointed at Uzbekistan, as well. Perhaps Sibel and Borat could do a joint press conference?

---------
update from Miguel in the comments:

For the record, Sibel has mentioned Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan, Pakistan and Tajikistan.

She has never mentioned Kazahkstan or Turkmenistan.

Interview: Sibel Edmonds Manifesto

2006-10-06T12:31:00.000+10:00

This is Part One of my extended interview with Mathieu Verboud, co-director of Kill The Messenger - The story of whistle-blower Sibel Edmonds.

____________________________________

Luke Ryland: Mathieu, congratulations on the project. How long have you been working on the film?

Mathieu Verboud: We started around February 2005 – by then we had got in contact with Sibel and agreed that we should pay her a visit and we met her for the first time in DC in April 2005. Just one week before her appeal to the DC Circuit Court. Last time we saw her was in May 2006 - and during that time period, we spent about 90 days shooting the whole film.

LR: Right - you were also making your film Tranquility Bay along the way, right?

MV: Well, Tranquility Bay was already completed and edited – my co-filmmaker Jean-Robert and I were just waiting for the broadcast on the national TV station. By the time Tranquility Bay aired on TV (May 2006), we'd almost finished the shooting of Kill The Messenger.

Overall, we spent around a year working full time on the film on Sibel. Kill The Messenger was completed last August, and aired in France in September, for the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

LR: OK - so are you doing much media for the film?

MV: Quite a lot, all major dailies and radio stations reviewed the film. These reviews were very good, some very flattering. The film sheds light on people and situations we usually don’t know much about: spies, corrupt U.S officials and people like the fact that the film focused on that.

People like our story too because of Sibel. She brings humanity in an otherwise dark environnment. People love her. Some critics even said Sibel’s story helped them look at what went on recently with Iran, Israel, Lebanon with a different perspective. That’s nice to hear.

LR: Ok - How about you give a synopsis of the movie to kick us off.

MV: Let's start with what we wanted. We were interested in the whistleblower phenomenon - whistleblowing is something totally unfamiliar here in France. Regrettably, we don’t have this concept. So we wanted to tell the stories of those who come forward.

So we looked into major whistleblowers cases in the U.S and found out that there had been an epidemic of whistleblowing at the FBI and that’s how we got interested in Sibel's case. Also because people told us that she was quite a character…. At first, all we knew, besides the fact that she was an ex-FBI language specialist, was that she had ‘ found’ or ‘ heard’ or ‘discovered’ something during her short tenure at the FBI. She had a ‘secret’, she had been fired because of that secret and now she was engaged in a fight to expose the secret. The thing is she was gagged, so she couldn’t talk. We thought… well, what a great character for a film! (laughs)…

And we had no idea what the secret was about. Except that it was about spies and 9/11. Then we met her and she made it perfectly clear that she would not disclose anything to us…

Yet, there is something else she wanted to tell…

Sibel Edmonds Manifesto…

MV: We had a big interview in the beginning in April 2005 after she’d lost in the DC Circuit Court. A 2 hour interview in her house - she was very tense, very sharp - where she described the public side of the story, the case in general, the FBI retaliations etc, etc - without making any mention of the specifics of the secret itself. The name Dickerson was pronounced only once. We didn’t have the secret but so far, we had better: we had Sibel’s manifesto and it was a superb outline for the film.

At the same time, we decided we had to find out what it is that she couldn't tell. So we started our own investigation- the idea was to tell two stories unfolding at the same time. Sibel's journey with the government, and at the same time trying to look into the secret.

The film is divided this way - the first act of the film is about what happened to Sibel, who she is, and what she worked on etc. So far, there is no mention whatsoever of the American Turkish Council. We just know that she's been attacked by vicious people in the government, and that there's a very shady spy case.

In the second act of the film, Sibel counter-attacks - she creates the whistleblower coalition, she appeals her court-case, Paul Sperry writes his book ‘Infiltration’, the first book ever published that touches on the Sibel Edmonds case, and then we come across David Rose, the investigative journalist writing on Sibel for Vanity Fair and we stumble into the American Turkish Council - the ATC. We are about to embark into the ‘secret', till the end of the film.

At that very moment, around half-way through the film, we know that the whole Sibel Edmonds case is closely linked to Turkey, to NATO elements in Turkey like Douglas Dickerson and we now discover that the ATC is closely linked to the Military Industrial Complex, and that the whole case points to certain ‘weapons sales’, in this case a euphemism for arms trafficking.

And then in the last chapter of the film, we go into the secret and explore the links between Turkey, the U.S, Israel, Pakistan; possible links to Islamic groups; the role of Turkish Generals, and the role of neoconservatives, the Plame case - and how that all connects to Sibel.

LR: That's a lot of territory to cover in 84 minutes!

MV: Yes. There are some elements that we have, that you probably have as well, that we weren't able to include in the film for various reasons: what happened in Chicago for instance or the specific role of let’s say ex- U.S ambassador Marc Grossman. The reason is people here in France, first of all know almost NOTHING about the methods of the U.S intelligence community, know absolutely nothing about Sibel Edmonds, or about her case, nothing about what the gag order is, or what a whistle-blower is. They also have little knowledge of the Neocon-Israel connection. For the French viewer, it's an entirely new lesson.

We have a sequence for example at the American Turkish Council annual conference and this helps you understand the kind of business that takes place in this venue - yet telling EVERYTHING about Sibel’s secret is another story. Hard evidence, as you know, does not really exist in this case. We still know very little of what she knows. So we only mention two names of Neocons apparently connected to the case: Douglas Feith and Richard Perle.

LR: But you interviewed Marc Grossman, right?

MV: (laughs)… yes we did. But it's not included.

LR: Oh no!

MV: Well, we had good reasons not to include it in the French version. Again, if it's a film for the general public, people obviously unfamiliar with the daily routines of arms trafficking, unaware that some U.S officials could engage in weapons proliferation with people they themselves label as ‘the worst enemies of the free world!' That in itself is very interesting...

Those interested in the possible ‘behind-the-scene’ activities of ex-ambassador Grossman need to read this all-time classic by Christopher Deliso: "Lesser Neocons of L'Affaire Plame," an article which came out in November 2005. Excellent piece (laughs)… According to Chris, the road in Sibel’s case often leads to the Balkans. I agree. But in her case, all roads start and end in Pakistan, a country with a unique mix of islamic fundamentalism and nuclear power.

Once you’ve understood the main outline of Sibel’s case, you realize Pakistan is the place where everything started… back in the 1980’s…

____________________________________
NEXT UP: Part Two: U.S weapons for the jihad…

I'll post that in a couple of days.
update: see Part One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six