Former House Speaker Hastert Joins Turkish Lobby (Anyone Remember Sibel Edmonds ?)

Former House Speaker Hastert Joins Turkish Lobby (Anyone Remember Sibel Edmonds ?)

There's a context for posting this story. Where Hastert has a shady history regarding Turkish agents and 9/11 and Sibel Edmonds the Whistleblower.

Former House Speaker Hastert Joins Turkish Lobby

By Editor on Apr 23, 2009 in Armenia

WASHINGTON — The Turkish government has hired former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) to its team of lobbyists.

The Hill reported that Justice Department files reveal that Hastert, the longest-serving Republican Speaker, is working on a $35,000-a-month contract for the Turkish government through the lobbying firm he joined last year.

snip

http://www.mirrorspectator.com/2009/04/23/former-house-speaker-hastert-joins-turkish-lobby



............................................................

Hastert’s Turkish Allies Tied to Bin Laden

“If they were to allow the whole picture to emerge… certain elected officials will stand trial and go to prison.” – Sibel Edmonds
By Lynn Grant

08/15/05 "International Post" -- --- CHICAGO, Illinois, Aug 15 (IP) – During the current flurry of September 11th related news, one item has gone largely unnoticed.

Reports of former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds’ allegations concerning improper financial ties between House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Turkish officials and businessman have become a source of discontent for beltway insiders on both sides of the aisle.

However, the recent coverage has not addressed why Sibel Edmonds’ information regarding Speaker Hastert’s dealings with the Turks necessitated an in-depth investigation by the September 11th Commission.

In an August 10, 2005 interview about her reported allegations, Edmonds was asked, “What are you alleging about the Speaker of the House?” Though under a strict gag order, she replied:

“I have been giving all the details to the appropriate channels. And they have been confirmed. And what I have said all along is the fact that as far as the 9/11 is concerned, September 11 is concerned, these departments -- and when I say “these departments,” the Department of Justice, the Department of State, and the Department of Defense -- have intentionally blocked the investigations of real -- the real criminals in this country. …

Most of al Qaeda’s funding is… through narcotics. And have you heard anything to this date, anything about these issues which we have had information since 1997? And as I would again emphasize, we are talking about countries. And they are blocking this information, and also the fact that certain officials in this country are engaged in treason against the United States and its interests and its national security, be it the Department of State or certain elected officials.

While alluding to treason, Edmonds’ reply indicates that her allegations about Speaker Hastert are linked to al-Qaeda and the September 11th attacks.

To understand this link, it is necessary to examine the substance of Mrs. Edmonds’ allegations, as reported in the recent issue of Vanity Fair:

A large part of her work at the F.B.I. involved listening to the wiretapped conversations of people who were the targets of counter-intelligence investigations.…

Many involved an F.B.I. target at the city’s large Turkish Consulate, as well as members of the American-Turkish Council and the Assembly of Turkish American Associates. Some of the calls reportedly contained what sounded like references to large scale drug shipments and other crimes. …

One name, however, apparently stood out – a man the Turkish callers often referred to by the nickname “Denny boy.” It was the Republican congressman from Illinois and Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert.

According to some of the wiretaps, the F.B.I.’s targets had arranged for tens of thousands of dollars to be paid to Hastert’s campaign funds in small checks. Under Federal Election Commission rules, donations of less than $200 are not required to be itemized in public filings.

The Vanity Fair article adds:

The targets reportedly discussed giving Hastert tens of thousands of dollars in surreptitious payments in exchange for political favors and information. …

“She told us she’d heard mention of exchanges of information, dead drops—that kind of thing,” a congressional source says. “It was mostly money in exchange for secrets.” …

There was talk, she told investigators, of laundering the profits of large-scale drug deals and of selling classified military technologies to the highest bidder. …

“There was pressure within the bureau for a special prosecutor to be appointed and take the case on, “the official says. Instead, his colleagues were told to alter the thrust of their investigation – away from elected politicians and toward appointed officials. “This is the reason why Ashcroft reacted to Sibel in such an extreme fashion ,” he says “It was to keep this from coming out.”

snip

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9775.htm

was dealing with nuc secrets and Turkey.. and the secrets being funneled into Iran.. so that they knew what was going on.

It all ties together as a big play... maybe the reason for Bush's demonic twinkle. Al Qua-da, fights similarly to Taliban in training videos.. The CIA helped train Taliban. Al qua-da networks are run with money from drugs, hence the connection in Asia banking centers, and is set up as the world's bad guy.. In the mean time, the US has a boogey man and the military complex gears up to spend Trillions of taxpayer dollars fighting boogey men.

In the end, do they have nothing better to do than cause destruction? I suppose for some of them its just fun to toy with the mass populations.. acquiring riches and fames is already yesterday's business?

One must understand the history of the opium trade to understand today's news.

that if you don't prosecute criminals, you will not deter crime.

Hasteret obviously thinks there was nothing wrong in what he did.

representing a country largely split between extreme nationalists and religious maniacs would seem comfortably familiar.

In its predictability.

-Hoot

:kick:

waiting, waiting, waiting....

:kick:

Eric Edelman (RightWeb profile)
http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Edelman_Eric

Eric Edelman (SourceWatch page)
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Eric_Edelman

I thought I was good at finding tracking databases.....you have added so much to my stash of them, and I thank you.

It does get overwhelming at times to find out so much crap about the scoundrels, doesn't it?

I now save a local archived/cached copy of nearly every page I link to because pages are routinely deleted, their content changed, missing the critical discussions posted by readers, or the host site no longer existing. Within a few days, nearly all traces of the old contentis replaced or removed from the caches at Google and other search engines. (I suspect that Google has everything archived for internal use, but that help me or someone reading my posts.)

There are several sites which attempt to archive the entire Web, retaining each revised version of a page seen by their web crawlers and thus able to derive a "snapshot" of a web site as it appeared on any given date. These efforts can be quite useful, but have their limits. First, content can appear and disappear between crawler visits to the site and never by archived; the links posted at DU are particularly vulnerable to this, whether to a rapidly changing news site or to an obscure site that is infrequently visited by the crawlers.

Second, our informal concept of "linking to a web page" is the key to defining a web on top of a net, implemented by specifying HTML and the http: protocols and network services and then creating new types of software, web servers and browsers. For many years, most web pages existed as simple text files containing HTML containing links to images and other web pages. The link/URL processing was trivial: Use DNS to convert the server name to IP address, connect to socket 80 at that IP, send a message to that socket requesting the URL, and receive in response from the server the corresponding HTML file. The response from the web serverwas the same whether you, I, or a web crawler had requested the page.

Today, the link/URL is barely more than a "hint" to the hosting web server about what and how it will respond and what vast chain of events will be triggered. Even in a simple case, the content and formating might depend on who requested the "page" and what the hosting site knows about them -- consider your login to DU and your profile and preferences, maybe what browser you are using, posts by other users, and who knows what else.

Reality is much worse, more complex, less reliable, manipulated in all directions by valid content providers, malware of all sorts, marketing and market manipulation promoting products, scams, candidates, political causes, grassroots and astroturf, criminals, despots, the good, the bad, and the ugly -- and each of these, in turn, under attack by opposing forces. A very Mad world of Spy vs Spy (vs Spy vs Spy ...).

So make sure you save a local copy of things you find important while you can and be sure to verify that the saved version actually contains the content. Many sites now manipulate the browser and its cache so that your attempt to save the "page" triggers a refresh of the page from the server and the refreshed version is missing the actual content, replaced with just a link back to the web site. If you view the saved file with the browser, it will display with the content (retrieved again) and appear ok. Be sure by unplugging from the network and checking again, maybe using some application that lets you see the saved HTML itself.

When really paranoid, I make printed copies and even capture and print screen captures of my display containing the critical information. This technique usually avoids alerting the web site or other parties of your interest in this particular information and avoids leaving easily-accessible history of your actions. (Assuming your computer is not completely compromised by keyloggers or other spyware. That is probably not a good assumption for most people using popular browsers and environments -- MS Windows, Mac, Linux, Unix -- not even FF on Linux in safe mode or with noscript, flashblock, and such. Take precautions where you can, but assume that these efforts are inadequate and still at risk.)

Stay sane inside insanity.

Sorry for the long warning note, but
They mustn't carry out their evil deeds.