Former FBI Translator Sibel Edmonds Calls Current 9/11 Investigation Inade

(Transcript from WGDR radio)

http://baltimorechronicle.com/050704SibelEdmonds.shtml

snip

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


snip

JH: So they got the word down from Mueller, probably.

SE: I cannot confirm that for sure, but I can tell you that there is so much involvement, that if they did let this information out, and if they were to hold real investigations--I'm not talking about this semi-investigation they're holding under this "Joint Inquiry"--the pure show of the 9/11 Commission that has been getting the mass media's attention. If they were to do real investigations we would see several significant high level criminal prosecutions in this country. And that is something that they are not going to let out. And, believe me; they will do everything to cover this up. And I am appalled. I am really surprised. I'm taken back by seeing the mass media's reaction to this. They are the window to our government's operation and what are they doing?

snip


JH:I don't imagine that you are allowed to say much about that.

SE: You are correct. But I can tell you that the issue, on one side, boils down to money--a lot of money. And it boils down to people and their connections with this money, and that's the portion that, even with this book, has not been mentioned to this day. Because then it starts touching some people in high places.

snip

You get to a point where it gets very complex, where you have money laundering activities, drug related activities, and terrorist support activities converging at certain points and becoming one. In certain points - and they are separating those portions from just the terrorist activities. And, as I said, they are citing "foreign relations" which is not the case, because we are not talking about only governmental levels. And I keep underlining semi-legit organizations and following the money. When you do that the picture gets grim. It gets really ugly.

snip

JH: Here's a question that you might be able to answer: What is al-Qaeda?

SE: This is a very interesting and complex question. When you think of al-Qaeda, you are not thinking of al-Qaeda in terms of one particular country, or one particular organization. You are looking at this massive movement that stretches to tens and tens of countries. And it involves a lot of sub-organizations and sub-sub-organizations and branches and it's extremely complicated. So to just narrow it down and say al-Qaeda and the Saudis, or to say it's what they had at the camp in Afghanistan, is extremely misleading. And we don't hear the extent of the penetration that this organization and the sub-organizations have throughout the world, throughout their networks and throughout their various activities. It's extremely sophisticated. And then you involve a significant amount of money into this equation. Then things start getting a lot of overlap-- money laundering, and drugs and terrorist activities and their support networks converging in several points. That's what I'm trying to convey without being too specific. And this money travels. And you start trying to go to the root of it and it's getting into somebody's political campaign, and somebody's lobbying. And people don't want to be traced back to this money.

more

http://baltimorechronicle.com/050704SibelEdmonds.shtml

over here- http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1555133&mesg_id=1555133

To be specific. Bush needed 9-11. He knew about the planning and was counting on its occurrence. His Saudi friends and others carried it out with his knowledge and will his assistance. The look in the classroom was "Okay, mission accomplished, but I better not smile. I know, I'll keep on reading about goats. Then I'll flee in Air Force 1 in case they figure it out and I'll make sure all the witnesses are flown safely out of the country."

He was refering to the sources of terrorisy financing. Has any financiers been brought to justice for supporting terrorists? I didn't think so.

DOJ MOVES TO INVOKE STATE SECRETS PRIVILEGE TO PREVENT FBI WHISTELBLOWER FROM GIVING A DEPOSITION IN 9/11 SUIT

by

Michael C. Ruppert

Action Needed Monday and Tuesday, April 26 & 27

April 26, 2004 1400 PDT ( FTW) -- FBI whistleblower and former translator Sibel Edmonds, who has appeared on 60 MINUTES and recently been interviewed in many of the largest newspapers in the world has something to say. We know already that Senator Charles Grassley has found her credible and that she has charged the government with lying for stating that it had no knowledge of the possibility that Al Qaeda might use hijacked airliners as weapons against buildings. She was placed under a gag order restricting her from speaking with the press about that knowledge by John Ashcroft in October of 2002 and she has pushed the envelope of that order in a multitude of recent interviews. The government has just moved to keep Edmonds from giving a deposition in response to a subpoena.

So scared of what she might say is the Bush administration that the Department of Justice has moved to impose the rarely used “State Secrets” privilege to prevent Edmonds from giving a deposition in a 9/11-related lawsuit. The case is the $100 trillion action filed in 2002 by 600 9/11 victim families against officials of the Saudi government and prominent Saudi citizens. FTW believes that the greatest crimes of 9/11, the ones that deserve the fullest attention of the American people, were committed by persons inside the US government, not in Saudi Arabia. I leave aside any opinions of the nature of the Saudi regime, about which FTW has written extensively. That is not the point.

While FTW has reservations about the possible motives for the suit as setting the stage for a destabilization of Saudi Arabia as a pretext for seizing Saudi oilfields, those reservations have nothing to do with the fact that a law is being invoked to conceal a crime. That is exactly what John Ashcroft's DoJ is attempting to do. Whatever Sibel Edmonds has to say, whatever she knows, is something the American people have a right and a need to hear. That right should transcend any law.

more...
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/042604_edmunds_alert.html

a must read for all those that care about getting to the truth.