Sunday, November 12, 2006

more on SIbel, Ed Bradley

in response to me posting the Ed Bradley, 60 minutes piece on sibel, Miguel writes:
"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."
Let me add a few comments:
1) much of this interview was left on the cutting-room floor.

2) sibel seems to buy into the idea (here and elsewhere) that Feghali was slowing down translations in order to increase the size of his department - i.e. a large pile of untranslated documents was the ticket to a bigger budget. this still doesn't make any sense to me.

3) much has been made of Grassley's claim that sibel is 'credible' - in this interview Grassley says 'she's absolutely credible - and the reason that she's credible is that a lot of people in the FBI have corroborated her story'

4) the story mentions Jan Dickerson - but it doesn't say that her husband works for the US military, or that he was previously suspected of being bribed when he was in Ankara. The story mentions that Jan 'now lives in Belgium' - but not that her and her husband fled the country to a NATO base.

5) the segment suggests that it was a coincidence that: 1) Jan Dickerson worked for the American Turkish Council 2) Jan Dickerson lied about the fact that she worked for the ATC 3) Jan Dickerson had friends, including her husband, at the ATC 4) Jan Dickerson 'mistranslated' wiretaps from the ATC because Dickerson was 'inexperienced.'

6) Bradley asks sibel what kind of information Dickerson left out of her translations. Sibel answered: "Activities to obtain US military and intelligence secrets"

I've been told that the corporate media won't touch Sibel's story because 60 Minutes did this story already. Are you satisfied with that?

3 comments:

calipendence said...

I think we have to be careful not to look too much for Grassley for support specifically to help Sibel get her story out, etc. Grassley has been known to have had it out with the FBI and other intelligence agencies in the past like the time when they were looking at the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1997. I think we need to be careful to separate true concerns Grassley might have had about Sibel's situation with perhaps some political opportunism he might have had with going after the FBI at the time.

He doesn't seem to be too much in to helping her now, and I recall that he was pretty much a champion for both Roberts and Alito, despite my emailing his office to ask about what they would do with State Secrets cases, which he never chose to ask any questions to them about, even when he was on the Judiciary committee.

lukery said...

agreed. i dont have a lot of confidence in him either.

rimone said...

I've been told that the corporate media won't touch Sibel's story because 60 Minutes did this story already. Are you satisfied with that?

do you really have to ask? moving on, have ANY of the biggies touched the Sibel story in any depth? atrios? FDL?

sorry for yet another Lebowski quote but 'this affects ALL of US, man.'