Statement of Sibel Edmonds Before the House Committee on Government Reform

http://www.antiwar.com/edmonds/

Statement of Sibel Edmonds
Before the House Committee on Government Reform, Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and Internal Relations, March 2, 2005

Emerging Threats: Overclassification and Pseudo-classification

Good afternoon, my name is Sibel Edmonds. I have been invited to provide you with testimony today regarding my direct experience with the use of excessive secrecy, rare privileges, and over-classification by the Department of Justice against me during the past three years. Thank you for giving me this opportunity. I believe that my case clearly illustrates how the government uses secrecy laws and classification to avoid accountability, to cover up problems and wrongdoing, and to gain unfair legal advantage in court.

I began working for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as a language specialist for several Middle Eastern languages starting shortly after 9/11, and was granted Top Secret Clearance. During my work, I became aware of problems within the translation unit involving criminal conduct against our national interests, potential espionage, serious security breaches threatening our intelligence, intentional mistranslation, and blocking of intelligence. I was asked, and later ordered, to refrain from reporting these allegations. I reported them, together with evidence, to higher management within the bureau. They refused to take any action, and again, they asked me not to pursue them. I then took these issues and evidence to the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General and to the Senate Judiciary Committee, because I believed that according to our laws these were the appropriate steps to take in this situation. As a result, I was retaliated against, was ordered to submit to a polygraph, and had my home computer confiscated. Finally, in March 2002 I was fired. The only explanation I received for getting fired was ‘for the convenience of the government.’

In March 2002, the Senate Judiciary Committee began investigating my case and allegations, and in June and July 2002, during two unclassified briefings with the staff of Senators Grassley and Senator Leahy, the FBI publicly confirmed all of my core allegations. These two Senators issued public statements and letters regarding these confirmations and my case, demanding expedited investigation by the Inspector General and response from the FBI. These letters and statements were widely disseminated in the media and on the Internet; including on the Senators’ own websites. When the judge overseeing my legal cases asked the government to produce any unclassified materials that was relevant to the substance of my allegations, the government took a truly extraordinary step: it moved to retroactively classify these letters, statements, and news releases that had been public for almost two years. It is quite clear that the government’s motivation was not to protect national security, but rather to protect itself from embarrassment and accountability. Senator Grassley characterized this retroactive classification as ‘ludicrous,’ and ‘gagging the congress.’ However, the Congress complied. Only after this highly unusual retroactive classification was challenged in court by POGO, a government watchdog organization, did the Department of Justice reverse itself and declare that this information was not considered classified and a danger to national security after all. I would like to request that these letters from Senators Grassley and Leahy be included in the record of today’s hearing.


..more..
===============

State Dept. Quashed 9/11 Links To Global Drug Trade
 -FBI Whistleblower

Sibel Edmonds- FBI Whistleblower, interview
SE: Everything – from drugs to money laundering to arms sales. And yes, there are certain convergences with all these activities and international terrorism.
CD: So with these organizations we're talking about a lot of money –
SE: Huge, just massive. They don't deal with 1 million or 5 million dollars, but with hundreds of millions.
CD: From your previous testimony and the examples I want to bring up next, it would seem that organized crime with terrorist links is really holding the reins inside powerful governments, even the American one. No?
SE: That may be, but I don't know. I didn't get high enough up on the ladder to find out. With all of this suspicious and unprecedented "state secrets" obstructionism from Ashcroft, it might seem that way, but I don't have any direct information.
CD: But what do think, within departments such as the Pentagon and the State Department. Do you suspect certain high officials may be profiting from terrorist-linked organized crime?
SE: I can't say anything specific with regards to these departments, because I didn't work for them. But as for the politicians, what I can say is that when you start talking about huge amounts of money, certain elected officials become automatically involved. And there are different kinds of campaign contributions – legal and illegal, declared and undeclared.
CD: Could this apparent toleration of dangerous criminal groups in the midst possibly be interpreted to mean that American policy is driven by the "ends justify the means" philosophy?
SE: But how are the ends possibly met by such activities? To this day, I just can't see how. What is happening does not benefit 99.9 percent of Americans – just a very small elite.
I'm no expert, but from what I have personally seen I can say that our national security is being compromised every day, because important investigations are being stopped, and potentially important clues are being overlooked. It's absolutely incredible that even after 9/11, certain individuals, foreign businessmen and others, among others, are still escaping scrutiny.
Okay, perhaps talking about the pre-9/11 world they could get away with saying "we didn't know," but to continue doing so – I mean, what if we are attacked by nuclear or chemical weapons, what will be their next excuse? That "we didn't know" it could happen? Come on! I can prove they are lying, because they know."

http://www.breakfornews.com/Sibel-Edmonds-Story.htm

http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=17640&c=206

Members of Congress Pledge Support for FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds

March 3, 2005

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: media@aclu.org

Members From Both Sides of the Aisle Promise to Investigate Problems at FBI After Hearing Wednesday

WASHINGTON - Two Members of Congress promised to investigate whistleblower Sibel Edmonds’ allegations against the FBI and raised concerns over the government’s response to her case after she testified Wednesday for the first time before Congress.

Edmonds, who was fired after exposing national security concerns at the FBI, received support from Representatives Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Christopher Shays, (R-Conn.) after testifying at a subcommittee hearing of the House Committee on Government Reform. Edmonds shared her story with the committee and answered questions as part of a series of speakers on over-classification and pseudo-classification. She testified about the government’s excessive use of classification to cover up its own misconduct in her case. The American Civil Liberties Union is representing Edmonds in her appeal to reinstate her case against the government.

Representative Maloney said she was outraged that Edmonds, who was trying to protect the United States by shedding light on national security breaches, has been punished by the government for her courage. Representative Maloney said the current classification system allows government agencies to silence whistleblowers and told Edmonds she would rally women leaders to support her case. She also said she would to write a bill named for Edmonds to solve classification problems.

"Our system, when we classify things, is supposed to protect us, not punish whistleblowers. It’s almost unbelievable," Representative Maloney said. "I find your testimony absolutely and completely terrifying."

..more..

If they don't keep their promise to actually "investigate" (rather than pull a smoke and mirror thingy), let's be sure to let them know about it.

Immediately after 9/11 the FBI hired Melek Can Dickerson, a Turkish translator, who was given a top-secret clearance although she worked for organizations that were FBI targets of investigation and had ongoing relationships with two individuals who were FBI targets of investigation. Dickerson used her translator position to block investigations into those organizations until she left hastily in 2002 and to take top secret documents out of the FBI with the assistance of her supervisor, Mike Feghali, who was subsequently promoted to supervisor of the Arabic languages unit;

http://www.newswithviews.com/public_comm/public_commentary16.htm

Edmonds is the translator hired by the FBI after 9-11 to help its
woefully inadequate staff translate documents and wiretaps
pertaining to the attacks in languages such as Farsi and Turkish. As
she has told the Voice in past and recent interviews, she was given
a top secret security clearance. She soon discovered that there were
what she describes as two enemy moles with possible connections to
9-11 working both in the FBI and with the Air Force in weapons
procurement for Central Asia, at one point. These were the
Dickersons: Douglas with the Air Force and his Turkish-born wife,
Melek Can Dickerson, with the FBI as a translator monitor. After
they were subpoenaed for a court hearing, they left for Belgium in
September 2002 and have not been heard from since.

Among other things Edmonds told her FBI superiors, she had
discovered that Melek Can Dickerson affixed Edmonds's name to a
printout of inaccurate translations. Properly translated, she says,
these wiretaps revealed a Turkish intelligence operative in
communication with his spies in both the Pentagon and the State
Department.

http://groups.google.ca/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=U2kJc.44922%24_V4.32999%40read1.cgocable.net&rnum=4

MUST read..there is so much information in this article

...the article mentions a woman named Melek Can Dickerson, a Turkish woman married to a major in the U.S. Air Force. The woman told Edmonds that she couldn't believe America was monitoring people who were their chief "persons of interest" because Dickerson and her husband had done favors for them...shopping...

"Ms. Edmonds has told the Judiciary Committee that soon after, Ms. Dickerson tried to establish social ties with her, suggesting they meet in Alexandria and introduce their husbands to each other.

When Sibel invited the visitors in for tea, she said, Major Dickerson began asking Matthew Edmonds if the couple had many friends from Turkey here in the U.S. Mr. Edmonds said he didn't speak Turkish, so they didn't associate with many Turkish people. The Air Force officer then began talking up a Turkish organization in Washington that he described, according to the Edmondses, as "a great place to make connections and it could be very profitable."

Sibel was sickened. This organization was the very one she and Jan Dickerson were monitoring in a 9/11 investigation. Since Sibel had adhered to the rule that an F.B.I. employee does not discuss bureau matters with one's mate, her husband innocently continued the conversation. Ms. Dickerson and her husband offered to introduce the Edmondses to people connected to the Turkish embassy in Washington who belonged to this organization. ..."My husband keeps thinking he's talking about promoting business deals," Ms. Edmonds later said of the encounter. "He has no idea the man is talking about criminal activities with some semi-legitimate front."

These are classic "pitch activities" to get somebody to spy for you, according to a Judiciary Committee staffer who investigated Ms. Edmonds' claims. ...The targets of that F.B.I. investigation left the country abruptly in 2002. Later, Ms. Edmonds discovered that Ms. Dickerson had managed to get hold of translations meant for Ms. Edmonds, forge her signature, and render the communications useless."

more
http://www.gailsheehy.com/9_11/9_11_art1_21.html

a most revealing article. Thanks..
Is there any wonder why they want to shut her up?

they don't care about the pawns (I mean people)

Anyone know?

http://www.villagevoice.com/generic/show_print.php?id=61790&page=webmondo2&issue=0510&printcde=MzMyOTk0ODk4OA==&refpage=L25ld3MvaW5kZXgucGhwP2lzc3VlPTA1MTAmcGFnZT13ZWJtb25kbzImaWQ9NjE3OTA=

Mondo Washington
Lost in Translation
Will a former FBI translator finally get to tell us what she knows about 9-11?

by James Ridgeway
March 4th, 2005 1:51 PM

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Against all odds, former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds's campaign to speak openly about what she knows regarding 9-11 and the FBI is moving forward—inch-by-inch.
<snip>

Edmonds sought without success to interest Congress and other civil libertarian groups, Only after the outspoken Jersey Girls—widows of 9-11 victims—pushed her case on the 9-11 Commission did anybody pay any attention to her. And even then she got the cold shoulder on Capitol Hill. She was allowed to sit in a secure briefing room and tell her story to a tape recorder while commission staff members sat by and watched. They never asked her any questions. Edmonds was not allowed to testify, and the only time her case came up was when Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste mentioned it in an aside to FBI director Robert Mueller. Both men agreed her case would be best left to another time. Edmonds approached Democratic candidate John Kerry but was turned away. Ditto for John Edwards. She has tried to interest the Pentagon since one strand of her story suggests a possible espionage activity by a defense official. She sought repeatedly to get the attention of Virginiaís Republican Senator John Warner, who heads the Armed Services Committee, but to no avail. The Pentagon dismissed her charges.

In recent months, she won support from the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington advocacy group working on defense issues; finally the ACLU jumped in. The Justice Department's inspector general finally released an unclassified report, more or less supporting her. Recently she was introduced to Christopher Shays, the Connecticut Republican. Shays and New York Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney allowed her to testify before hearings of their House Government Reform Subcommittee Wednesday.

After Edmonds told her story, Maloney said to her, "Just let me know when you're going into court, and I'll see how many women leaders I can get to come stand with you." The Associated Press reports she plans to introduce a bill that would restrict unnecessary security classifications and name it after Edmonds.


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