XPost: alt.politics.usa.republican, alt.politics.org.fbi, nyc.seminars 
 From: ob110ob@att.net 
  
 On Wed, 12 May 2004 01:29:03 -0400, 
 rosaphilia@webtv.net (*Because  **NYC** Could Be 
 BETTER!!) wrote: 
  
 >Former FBI Translator Sibel Edmonds Calls Current 9/11 Investigation 
 >Inadequate 
 > 
 >by Jim Hogue 
 > 
 >Baltimore Chronicle and Sentinel 
 >Friday, May 7, 2004 
 > 
 > 
 >INTRODUCTION: Sibel Edmonds and Behrooz Sarshar, beginning in December 
 >of 2001, began filing reports to their superiors at the FBI. These 
 >reports could lead to the collapse of a corrupt power structure that has 
 >a stranglehold on the very institutions that are obligated to control 
 >it. 
 > 
 >We cannot excuse these institutions, for while they fiddle, they pass 
 >death sentences on their own troops, and on the people of Afghanistan 
 >and Iraq. On April 30th, Sibel Edmonds was my guest for 50 minutes on 
 >WGDR radio. What follows is an edited transcript of the interview. The 
 >editing is for the sake of a more readable piece. 
 > 
 >Sibel Edmonds is a former FBI translator. She blew the whistle on the 
 >cover-up of intelligence that names some of the culprits who 
 >orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. 
 >These culprits are protected by the Justice Department, the State 
 >Department, the FBI, the White House and the Senate Judiciary Committee. 
 > 
 >They are foreign nationals and Americans. Ms. Edmonds is under two gag 
 >orders that forbid her to testify in court or mention the names of the 
 >people or the countries involved. 
 > 
 >THE INTERVIEW JH: The people who have so far been interviewed on this 
 >program have all been authors and researchers, and here we have someone 
 >who, for the most part, has first-hand information. Ladies and 
 >Gentlemen, your guest is Sibel Edmonds, formerly of the FBI, a 
 >translator who joined the FBI shortly after 9/11. 
 > 
 >Ms. Edmonds, what I'll do is invite you to tell us whatever you would 
 >like--your stint with the FBI--and what the brouhaha with Ashcroft and 
 >company is all about. 
 > 
 >SE: I started working for the Bureau immediately after 9/11 and I was 
 >performing translations for several languages: Farsi, Turkish, and 
 >Azerbaijani. 
 > 
 > 
 > And I do have top-secret clearance. And after I started working for the 
 >Bureau, most of my translation duties included translations of documents 
 >and investigations that actually started way before 9/11. 
 > 
 > And certain documents werebeing sent that needed to be re-translated 
 >for various reasons, and of course certain documents had to be 
 >translated for the first time due to the backlog. 
 > 
 >During my work there I came across some very significant issues that I 
 >started reporting in December of 2001 to the mid-level management within 
 >the FBI. 
 > 
 >They said to basically leave it alone, because if they were to get into 
 >those issues it would end up being a can of worms. 
 > 
 >And after I didn't see any response from this mid-level bureaucratic 
 >management I took it to higher levels all the way up to [assistant 
 >director] Dale Watson and Director Mueller. And, again, I was asked not 
 >to take this any further and just let it be. And if I didn't do that 
 >they would retaliate against me. 
 > 
 >At that point, which would be around February 2002, they came and they 
 >confiscated my computer, because, they said, they were suspecting that I 
 >was communicating with certain Senate members and taking this issue 
 >outside the Bureau. 
 > 
 >And, at that point, I was not. They did not find anything in my computer 
 >after they confiscated it. And they asked me to take a polygraph as to 
 >the allegations and reports I'd made. I volunteered and I took the 
 >polygraph and passed it without a glitch. They have already confirmed 
 >this publicly. 
 > 
 >In March 2002 I took this issue to the Senate Judiciary Committee and 
 >also I filed it with the Department of Justice Inspector General's 
 >office. 
 > 
 >And as per the Senate Judiciary Committee's request the IG started an 
 >expedited investigation on these serious issues; and they promised the 
 >Senate Judiciary Committee that their report for these investigations 
 >would be out by fall 2002 latest. 
 > 
 >And here we are in April 2004 and this report is not being made public, 
 >and they are citing "state privilege" and "national security" for not 
 >making this report public. 
 > 
 >Three weeks after I went to the Senate Judiciary Committee the Bureau 
 >terminated my contract, and they cited "government's convenience." 
 > 
 >I started working with the Senate Judiciary Committee that was 
 >investigating this case, and I appeared before the Inspector General's 
 >office for their investigation several times, and I also requested 
 >documents regarding these reports under the Freedom of Information Act; 
 >and they blocked this by citing again the "state secret privilege" and 
 >"national security" refusing to make these documents public. 
 > 
 >On October 18th 2002 Attorney General Ashcroft came out personally, in 
 >public, asserted this rare "state secret privilege" on everything that 
 >had to do with my case. 
 >And they cited "diplomatic relations" and certain "foreign relations" 
 >that would be "at stake" if I were to take this issue and make it 
 >public. And, since then, this has been acting as a gag on my case. 
 > 
 >I testified before the [9/11] commission on February 11th 2004, and as I 
 >said, I have been waiting for this report that they [the Attorney 
 >General's office] have been blocking for a year and a half from becoming 
 >public. 
 > 
 >The information I requested under the Freedom of Information Act has 
 >been blocked for two years. And I have been campaigning for the past 
 >three months trying to get the Senate Judiciary Committee that has the 
 >oversight authority and responsibility to start its own public hearings. 
 > 
 >However, this request is again being blocked. Now they [AG] are citing 
 >this upcoming election as reason. And here I am. 
 > 
 >JH: And it is the Attorney General who is blocking your testimony. 
 > 
 >SE: Senator Leahy, on April 8, 2004, sent a very strong letter to 
 >Attorney General Ashcroft, citing my case stating that he, Senator 
 >Leahy, has been asking questions, and has a lot of issues that have not 
 >been addressed, and asking AG Ashcroft to come and provide answers. 
 > 
 >And AG Ashcroft for the past two years has refused. So he [Leahy] is 
 >calling for a public hearing. However, Senator Hatch, who is the 
 >Republican Chairman of the Senate, has been a road block. And Senator 
 >Grassley [a Republican member of the Senate Judiciary Committee] went on 
 >the record with New York Observer's Gail Sheehy and said that Senator 
 >Hatch is blocking this investigation from taking place and for this 
 >public hearing to be held by the Senate Judiciary Committee. 
 > 
 >JH: So Hatch has the power to keep Leahy and Grassley.... 
 > 
 >SE: Correct. And now it is becoming a partisan issue. However, I keep 
  
 [continued in next message] 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)