As you know, I've been promising a manifesto for months (!) about Sibel and how it all fits together.
The post below has been in its current (incomplete) state (since the last time i contributed was on november 28) - for a bunch of reasons, i'm going to post it now, as it is.
back to my sibel obsession.
1) what is Sibel claiming?
2) does she have any credibility?
3) who does she suggest is involved?
4) who fits that profile?
What are Sibel's Main Claims?Sibel makes 2 specific related claims
a) Sibel claims that she has information which proves that senior officials knew that there were plans to attack America months before 9/11.
"There was general information about the time-frame, about methods to be used but not specifically about how they would be used and about people being in place and who was ordering these sorts of terror attacks. There were other cities that were mentioned. Major cities with skyscrapers."and
"President Bush said they had no specific information about 11 September and that is accurate but only because he said 11 September," she said. There was, however, general information about the use of airplanes and that an attack was just months away."b) Sibel claims that she has evidence of a global multi-billion dollar smuggling/dealing network of weapons and drug which is hidden in plain view. Of course, there is also the requisite money-laundering infrastructure. She claims that the network comprises senior american government officials, terrorists, and 'unsavoury regimes.'
and they merge, giving us:
“drug trafficking, money laundering, foreign names and American names directly involved in the financing of the 9-11 attacks on WTC (World Trade Center) and the Pentagon.”
Does Sibel Have Any Credibility?Sibel was a translator for the FBI with a top-secret clearance in Turkish, Azerbaijani and Farsi. She was hired in the immediate days after 91101 - working "about four days a week, generally from 5 to 11 p.m." and was fired 6 months later in March 02.
She sure seemed to learn a whole lot of secrets in that short period!
On the other hand, her story was deemed suffiently credible to a bunch of people - specifically Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Senior Member, Senate Judiciary Committee and Robert Mueller, Director, FBI. Attorney General John Ashcroft apparently got really nervous about a lot of stuff that Sibel was saying and invoked the States Secret Act - bacially gagging her from saying anything - including going to the extraordinary extent of retroactively reclassifying stuff that was previously in the public domain(!). Sibel testified to the 911 Commission, although she received nary a mention. A bunch of other folk from various government agencies (FBI, CIA, FAA, DIA, Customs) wrote a letter to Elliot Spitzer asking him to investigate.
xymphora offers some words of caution:
"Edmonds sometimes makes me a bit nervous as she seems overly adept with the terms and arguments of conspiracy theory for someone who is supposed to have been a lowly FBI translator (it's like she's been reading Peter Dale Scott!). Is she part of the battle in Washington between the Bush Administration enablers involved in the drugs/arms business who don't mind directly or indirectly supporting al Qaeda if it is good for business, and those old-fashioned types who still consider that dealing with American enemies is treason?"I agree that some caution is warranted, particularly given her short, part-time tenure - to counter that argument, however, there seemed to be a deliberate effort to keep Turkic language translators out of the translation department. They 'lost' Sibel's job application, only to find it again when she called to enquire years later, and somehow had her security clearance ready to go on 9/12 - when she learned that she was the only Turkish translator - ergo its possible that certain people knew that they were being bugged, but didnt really care because they 'knew' that the conversations would never see the light of day.
For current purposes, I'll assume that there is something there, there.
Who Does Sibel Suggest is Involved?
As I mentioned earlier, Sibel has been gagged under the States Secret Act - therefore we can only guess. She claims that the network is actually visible and she has provided a roadmap of sorts - the task therefore is to triangulate her data points and see where we end up.
Firstly, lets try to get a handle on the scope of her charges. This from an August, 05 interview of Sibel (SE) with Christopher Deliso (CD):
SIBEL: Essentially, there is only one investigation – a very big one, an all-inclusive one. Completely by chance, I, a lowly translator, stumbled over one piece of it.That's quite a claim, no? The Theory Of Everything. Of course, we've seen similar criminal networks before - like BCCI, which John Kerry helped unravel in his earlier years (which he chose not to mention in the election campaign for some reason. perhaps he didnt think "fighting the 'War on Terror'" wouldnt sell (or that voters would confuse it with the BBC!))
But I can tell you there are a lot of people involved, a lot of ranking officials, and a lot of illegal activities that include multi-billion-dollar drug-smuggling operations, black-market nuclear sales to terrorists and unsavory regimes, you name it. And of course a lot of people from abroad are involved. It's massive. So to do this investigation, to really do it, they will have to look into everything.
CD: But you can start from anywhere –
SIBEL: That's the beauty of it. You can start from the AIPAC angle. You can start from the Plame case. You can start from my case. They all end up going to the same place, and they revolve around the same nucleus of people. There may be a lot of them, but it is one group. And they are very dangerous for all of us.
So now we know what she is claiming, and we know that the idea isnt unprecedented.
Which countries does she claim are involved?
SIBEL: Turkey, Azerbaijan, and all the 'Stans, including Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, and [non-Turkic countries like] Afghanistan and Pakistan.she specifically goes out of her way to call them 'quasi-allies'. and, of course, there's America.
And why dont we prosecute these issues?
SIBEL: this would upset "certain foreign relations." But it would also expose certain of our elected officials, who have significant connections with high-level drugs- and weapons-smuggling – and thus with the criminal underground, even with the terrorists themselves.What's the official excuse?
SIBEL: 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." (link)and
OK, you're looking at Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, and these are the countries that now we are busy establishing bases in... They are not even naming these countries. The role that Pakistan played before and the role that Pakistan is playing today." (link)And where is most of the corruption within the USA?
" some of them in the Department of Defense, some of them in the Department of State" (link)and
"CD: I know you can't name names, but are there any government agencies in particular that you can single out as being more corrupt or more involved with the substance of your allegations?and
SIBEL: The Department of State.
CD: What, the most corrupt?
SIBEL: The Department of State is easily the most corrupted of the major government agencies." (link)
SIBEL: Watch the Department of State. Watch people who are involved with the countries I mentioned above. Watch their careers, where they were stationed, what jobs they held, what were their areas of expertise, where these interests overlap. Were they involved with weapons procurement ever? Would anything in their resumé indicate knowledge of and experience in not one, but several of these countries I have mentioned?and
Because you know, it is not very often you can find someone with the requisite linguistic and cultural training necessary for working with several countries simultaneously, as well as the acumen and right mindset for these kinds of adventures. There can't be many.
Look out for the organizations they're involved in. Look at where these memberships overlap. Two major lobby groups that have come out in one way or another have been the American-Turkish Council and AIPAC. They're not the only ones, but you can start with them. Look at their members, their leaders past and present. Look at where these names overlap with the qualities I mentioned above.
What I am telling you is that this network is visible, and it is possible to grasp what's going on. And I think to a certain extent it's obvious that some of your neocons will be involved in these criminal activities. You don't need me to tell you that. But too often, they [the media] have looked in the wrong places.
CD: An example?
SIBEL: Well, I'm wondering why in this "war on terror" they aren't taking a look at the role of banks in Dubai, banks in Cyprus – they've always concentrated on banks in places like, say, Switzerland. They almost never look at these two other huge areas for money-laundering." (link)
"SIBEL: ... but also you should pay attention to the fact that some of these people have been (at the Pentagon and State) for a while, and some of these people had their roots in there even in the mid-1990s.(as ive mentioned before - it's not obvious here whether she is saying: a) a mixture of both career officials and political appointees, or b) people whose appointments are both 'career' and 'political'.)
Scott Horton: So more career officials rather than political appointees.
SIBEL: Or maybe a mixture of both."
Who Fitz (sic) the Profile?
Riffing off that last quote from the interview by Scott Horton, xymphora wrote:
"Who is she referring to? The United States has a peculiar habit of completely changing government officials from administration to administration - is that habit unique amongst sophisticated countries? - and it is quite unusual for a senior bureaucrat to survive from a Democrat President's administration to a Republican President's administration. Who survived from Clinton to Bush? The most prominent figure I can think of is Marc Grossman, who had until his recent retirement and cashing in been Bush's Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. Grossman had met with Pakistani General Mahmoud Ahmed when Ahmed was visiting Washington in the week before September 11, 2001. He had had a long career as a professional diplomat, and had been Clinton's ambassador to Turkey (remember that Edmonds' allegations refer to translations of Turkish documents for the FBI). He was appointed by Clinton to be Assistant Secretary of State for European and Canadian Affairs in 1997. From 1984 to 1986, he had been the Deputy Director of the Private Office of Lord Carrington, then Secretary General of NATO. The husband and wife team that Edmonds has fingered for wrongdoing are USAF Major Douglas Dickerson and Melek Can (aka Jan Dickerson). Douglas Dickerson, who had been working for the USAF selling American weapons systems to the 'Stans, was protected by posting him to NATO in Belgium."I've written about grossman previously - he is knee-deep with Feith and Perle in their 'lobbying' efforts at the nexus of israel and turkey and arms deals. Grossman is also a triatorgator - he organised for *the* report on wilson to be produced, and disseminated. ive discussed the issue before, emptywheel suggests that grossman is a great candidate for the 'source' for the sep29, 03 Wapo article which claims that the whole outing of plame was a complete mistake - 'purely for revenge'. i suspect something more nefarious.
in any case, it seems that the suspicions about grossman were apparently well-founded. Christopher Deliso's piece earlier this week stated:
"Although Grossman "has not been as high profile in the press" FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds cryptically told me the other day, "don't overlook him – he is very important."" (emphasis in the original)Deliso's piece also asked questions about Eric Edelman - i wrote about his history for this very purpose (and here). Edelman was recently Ambassador to Turkey, is entangled in traitorgate, has a long history inside the wolfowitz/cheney/perle cabal, was recently (recess) appointed to Feith's position at DoD - after having misrepresented his involvement in traitorgate in his Senate filings.
Edelman's official bio is here - he certainly meets Sibel's criteria that "some of these people have been (at the Pentagon and State) for a while, and some of these people had their roots in there even in the mid-1990s" - Edelman also survived xymphora's observation/filter that "it is quite unusual for a senior bureaucrat to survive from a Democrat President's administration to a Republican President's administration." Even more than that, Edelman moved from Cheney's inner-circle to the Turkey outpost, after the invasion, for some reason, and then recently back into the loving arms again. I can only assume the Turkey posting was integral to whatever the hell is going on. The Turkey gig seems like a banishment of sorts - i cant think of another neocon player who was thrown into the wilderness, and then recruited back to the heart of the operation.
Other recent Turkish ambassadors - and who therefore may be of interest are Mark Parris (Grossmans predecessor) and Ross Wilson (Edelman's sucessor).
Obviously these specific people are merely the enablers. Sibel points to a bunch of other groups that she calls 'semi-legit' - and she famously points to the ATC and others as another bunch of enabling agents. As i've mentioned, i wouldnt be surprised if USG organisations were also involved (something like USAID or NED or the DEA, for example). She also points to certain 'lobbyists' - primarily Feith and Perle as i've discussed before - and i wouldnt be surprised if our friend Charles Black isnt part of the same gravy train (although sibel hasnt pointed in that direction).
And then there are a bunch of players that help with the logistics - companies like Giza Technologies, for example - but i dont have any insight at all into the logistics side of it.
So there you have it - an incomplete post - but hopefully that will put things in some perspective, for now. I'll have more to come (he promises, again). I'll throw up a couple of other posts that i've been 'working' on as well.