Thursday, March 23, 2006

Sibel Edmonds

Ron Brynaert has an article at Raw Story about Sibel Edmonds filing a recusal of Judge Reggie Walton. Edmonds is using Walton's less-than-candid financial disclosure statement (pdf file) as her legal argument. The statement looks like someone really likes to use a black magic marker.

I have written posts on Edmond that have been linked around the net. These two are a good place to start.
http://sullivan40.diaryland.com/sibel.html
http://sullivan40.diaryland.com/sibel2.html

The short version is Edmonds worked as a translator for the FBI. She listened to pre-9-11 intercepts. The Justice Department refuses to let her testify to what she heard. There has been speculation she heard material relating to Pakistan's relationship with Al Qaeda.

The White House certainly would not want Edmonds testify. Her allegation of FBI incompetence have been proven to be true.


According to Bureau translators, agents learned in April that bin Laden was planning an attack involving hijacked airliners. Why this didn't sound the alarm, nobody knows. The matter disappeared into the bureaucracy.

The role of the Bureau in muzzling Sibel Edmonds, the interpreter who tried to blow the whistle on the Bureau's translation operations pertaining to 9-11, is well known. The FBI and Justice Department fought to prevent Edmonds from giving public testimony and so far the courts have backed them up.


I plan on writing more about Edmonds in the next few days. To show how far Ashcroft went to silence Edmonds - he declared she couldn't speak. The legal reasoning was "state secrets". This legal term was created during the United States v. Reynolds. The United States want to keep classified details, of a B-29 bomber crash, from the widows. Hence the legal reasoning. Ashcroft used state secrets to clasify a letter written by Sen. Patrick J. Leahy and Sen. Chuck Grassley on Edmonds behalf. The letter was taken off the Senate website. WaPo is the only place to see the whole letter. I posted a portion before Ashcroft had the Senate delete it. My old blog is cited in a legal motion filed by the Project On Government Oversight. The Justice Department gave up before trial. Looks like I won't be going to a CIA blacksite.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home