* Not linked because of unsafe reputation WOT
October 2, 2009 · By Erik Leaver
Five pillars of an exit strategy for Afghanistan
For years, the war in Afghanistan has been in crisis. But now with a failed Afghan election, the resurgence of the Taliban as a political power, NATO allies withdrawing from the battlefield, and Pakistan's tribal areas under increasing influence from the Taliban and al-Qaeda, the situation looks worse than ever. Obama and his team are spinning their wheels trying to devise a policy to right the sinking ship, but the most sensible solution, for Afghans and U.S. citizens, is to start planning a way out.
As U.S. and NATO troops start the ninth year of war, there is little progress to be shown. This year has proven to be the most deadly for U.S. and coalition troops since the war began. Over 1,500 Afghan civilians have died this year and more than 450 Afghan security forces have died.
Sadly, the sacrifices these solders made have not resulted in better conditions for Afghans on the ground. Agricultural production is at its lowest since the war began, only 23% of the population has access to clean drinking water, and 40% lives below the poverty line. Life expectancy in Afghanistan is 44 years. Three million Afghans have fled their country. According to a UN threat assessment, 40% of Afghanistan is today either Taliban-controlled or a high-risk area for insurgent attacks.
Beyond the human toll, the war is taking a severe financial hit on the United States. To date, the U.S. has spent more than $220 billion in Afghanistan. Over 90% of that spending has been for the military. Today, the U.S. is spending $4 billion a month in Afghanistan and has eclipsed the costs of Iraq for the first time.
But policymakers in Washington don't see Afghanistan being in crisis for these reasons. Instead, the focus is on the tension between the White House and the Department of Defense on two key questions: what is the proper mission for troops and should the United States send additional soldiers?
Few players in Washington are asking the most important questions, is there a role for troops at this point at all, what does an exit strategy look like and when can we get there?
In May of 2009, Obama tapped General Stanley McChrystal to take over as commander of the forces in Afghanistan. Formerly head of Joint Special Operations Command, McChrystal came to the job with high marks for his role in directing the military's clandestine special operations in Iraq. When he came officially on board in June, McChrystal started yet another policy review.
Delivered to Obama on August 30, the review set off a firestorm at the White House and in the media. In part, the controversy revolved around the leaking of the classified report by Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward on September 20. But the real debate unfolded around McChrystal's statement that if he didn't get reinforcements his mission would "likely result in failure."
The report exposed an existing divide between the military and civilian policymakers, with the brass supporting McChrystal's assessment for more troops and the civilians wary of an escalation. But the leak deepened this divide, as controversy brewed about who leaked the report, and more importantly, why.
The divide over the next steps in Afghanistan extends outside of Washington as well with a new USA Today poll indicating that 50% of Americans oppose sending more troops to Afghanistan, a 15% drop in support from March, when Obama ordered more troops. And where perhaps it matters most, in Afghanistan, support is even lower. A February 2009 ABC/BBC/ARD poll found that only 18%of Afghans support increasing the number of U.S. troops in their country.
On September 26, a spokesperson confirmed that McChrystal submitted a formal request for more troops but refused to comment on the number of additional troops requested. However, estimates of McChrystal's request range from 10,000 to 45,000 troops. Paul Pillar, national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia during the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, dryly noted that if the administration requests the upper range then "the US will reach the level of the Russians at the peak of their deployment in the eighties: more than 100,000."
Aware of the controversy within the administration and the public, Obama has scheduled at least five meetings with his national security team over the next two weeks to reexamine the strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Adding further tension is yet another request for additional war spending that lawmakers in the House and Senate expect to complete in the next month.
But the question remains, even if McChrystal gets all of the troops he wants, is the mission possible? While it seems that a narrow mission that Obama proposed back in March to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan" could be within the grasp of the United States and NATO, McChrystal's counterinsurgency strategy seems unobtainable, even in his own review. He notes that the Afghan state is too weak to build the support needed for a robust counterinsurgency campaign and that NATO may not be well trained, equipped, or properly motivated for success.
Indeed, Afghanistan is causing many to question NATO's ability to last much beyond its 60th anniversary this year.
Furthermore, McChrystal's plan is highly dependent on the training of the Afghan National Army (ANA). Such training has been a dismal failure in the past eight years, even as the United States has spent $17.6 billion instructing the ANA. Saying that we now can do better is a dubious proposition at best. Rebuilding the Afghan military is no small task, no matter how many trainers McChrystal would like to send.
The alternative suggested by many of the earlier strategic reviews and now championed by Vice President Joe Biden, is to narrow the mission to focus on al-Qaeda and the Taliban, essentially calling for action to stop Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven for terrorists. Indeed, this is the counter-terrorism strategy that President Bush pursued with little success. The problem with even this more limited objective is that the United States or NATO could not achieve it without staying in Afghanistan forever. As long as the United States and NATO forces are there in great numbers, it won't be claimed as a safe haven. But when forces leave, al-Qaeda would simply return.
The inertia of the last eight years is hard to overcome. In some sense, it's more difficult with Democrats both in the White House and running Congress. If Obama were to withdraw from Afghanistan and an attack occurred against the United States, the party fears that it would stand accused of being weak on defense for another 40 years. On the other side of the coin, doubling down on George Bush's war by sending more troops and resources has little chance of success. Even if it did succeed, such a strategy would likely further damage the U.S. economy, military, and our standing in the world in the process.
Another option is needed on the table — a clear and measurable timetable for withdrawal.
The timetable that was set in Iraq indicates that such an approach can be useful in extricating the United States from a bad position. Most importantly, it begins to disarm the Taliban’s argument that the "occupiers" will never leave. Calling for a timetable for withdrawal also recognizes that at some point Afghanistan, like Iraq and almost all other wars, will end with a negotiated peace treaty.
Figuring out what that treaty should say and constructing a timetable to meet those conditions should be the next step in Afghanistan. Given the lack of legitimacy for the Karzai government and the relative political strength of the Taliban, negotiations must include a wide range of Afghans. Key principles for a treaty should include:
Deny al-Qaeda Safe Haven. Most analysts would argue that keeping Afghanistan (and other countries across the globe) free of al-Qaeda and terrorist networks should be a primary objective for global security. But the manner in which this can be achieved is under fierce debate. Occupation and options for open invasion whenever deemed necessary should be off the table. Instead, relying on the power in the United Nations Security Council and the provisions of Chapter VII provide nation states the opportunity to adequately protect themselves from imminent attack. Coupled with an international effort to track and capture members of terrorist networks, this should provide the United States and the international community with the strongest response possible. One primary example of this was the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was not nabbed in a military raid but by combined police work.
Too much of the debate has focused on who rules Afghanistan and not on our goal of isolating al-Qaeda. The United States shouldn’t try to determine who can be in the government, how it is chosen, or how it rules, so long as that government abides by an agreement not to harbor al-Qaeda, and to work with the international community to enforce that agreement. The Taliban itself is not a threat to the United States.
Commit to Development. Afghanistan is one of the most underdeveloped nations in the world. Funding for development so far has been far below needed levels. The country urgently needs basic infrastructure. Without roads, access to markets, better agricultural inputs, and available credit, local businesses can't start up or thrive. Such levels of commerce are needed to help combat the lucrative drug trade and raise the population out of poverty.
With few natural resources and a government highly dependent on international contributions, dedicated funding from the international community is needed. However, aid provided so far has not been successful. Too many projects are planned, designed, and implemented with far too little involvement from Afghans. Failure to learn from Greg Mortenson's book, Three Cups of Tea, where the success of Mortenson's development projects are dependent on working hand-in-hand with the local population, has doomed many of these projects. Aid should go directly to Afghan led organizations, coupled with strong auditing by international agencies.
Withdraw all Combat Troops. Foreign troops on the ground (and drone attacks from the air) have been the biggest irritant to Afghan citizens and have been the most important tool for recruiting in terrorist networks. A commitment to withdrawing all combat troops will help deflate the recruitment for these groups. While growing the Afghan National Army is critical for the security of Afghanistan, the lack of human rights training, measures of accountability, and most important, a central government to report to, has severely undermined the legitimacy of these troops. Further training must be refocused and fall under a common set of guidelines, including oversight under the Leahy Law that suspends training funding for any groups involved in human rights abuses.
Separate Pakistan from Afghanistan. No essay on Afghanistan these days seems to omit the problems arising in Pakistan. It is wrong to see the distinct challenges facing these two countries as one struggle and the U.S. history in Pakistan requires a far different approach. The United States must address directly with Pakistan the flow of al-Qaeda and the Taliban into that country.
Clearly there are other steps to be taken, but these are the most important and should be the starting point for negotiations. As much as the citizens of United States and the world want President Obama to succeed in fixing Afghanistan, the policies that are under discussion are most likely to put us one more "Friedman Unit" away from a resolution. With more civilians and soldiers bound to perish during that time, it's time for a fundamentally different approach — one that can greatly diminish the greatest threats to the United States and at the same time, start Afghanistan on the road to recovery.
As U.S. and NATO troops start the ninth year of war, there is little progress to be shown. This year has proven to be the most deadly for U.S. and coalition troops since the war began. Over 1,500 Afghan civilians have died this year and more than 450 Afghan security forces have died.
Sadly, the sacrifices these solders made have not resulted in better conditions for Afghans on the ground. Agricultural production is at its lowest since the war began, only 23% of the population has access to clean drinking water, and 40% lives below the poverty line. Life expectancy in Afghanistan is 44 years. Three million Afghans have fled their country. According to a UN threat assessment, 40% of Afghanistan is today either Taliban-controlled or a high-risk area for insurgent attacks.
Beyond the human toll, the war is taking a severe financial hit on the United States. To date, the U.S. has spent more than $220 billion in Afghanistan. Over 90% of that spending has been for the military. Today, the U.S. is spending $4 billion a month in Afghanistan and has eclipsed the costs of Iraq for the first time.
But policymakers in Washington don't see Afghanistan being in crisis for these reasons. Instead, the focus is on the tension between the White House and the Department of Defense on two key questions: what is the proper mission for troops and should the United States send additional soldiers?
Few players in Washington are asking the most important questions, is there a role for troops at this point at all, what does an exit strategy look like and when can we get there?
Beltway Bickering
Running on a platform that stressed that Afghanistan was the "good war," President Obama not surprisingly authorized a troop increase for Afghanistan of 21,000 soldiers just two months into office. He made this decision on the heels of no less than eight strategy reviews conducted during the end of 2008 and beginning of 2009. Coupled with his troop increase, Obama issued his own five point plan in March focused on "a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan."In May of 2009, Obama tapped General Stanley McChrystal to take over as commander of the forces in Afghanistan. Formerly head of Joint Special Operations Command, McChrystal came to the job with high marks for his role in directing the military's clandestine special operations in Iraq. When he came officially on board in June, McChrystal started yet another policy review.
Delivered to Obama on August 30, the review set off a firestorm at the White House and in the media. In part, the controversy revolved around the leaking of the classified report by Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward on September 20. But the real debate unfolded around McChrystal's statement that if he didn't get reinforcements his mission would "likely result in failure."
The report exposed an existing divide between the military and civilian policymakers, with the brass supporting McChrystal's assessment for more troops and the civilians wary of an escalation. But the leak deepened this divide, as controversy brewed about who leaked the report, and more importantly, why.
The divide over the next steps in Afghanistan extends outside of Washington as well with a new USA Today poll indicating that 50% of Americans oppose sending more troops to Afghanistan, a 15% drop in support from March, when Obama ordered more troops. And where perhaps it matters most, in Afghanistan, support is even lower. A February 2009 ABC/BBC/ARD poll found that only 18%of Afghans support increasing the number of U.S. troops in their country.
On September 26, a spokesperson confirmed that McChrystal submitted a formal request for more troops but refused to comment on the number of additional troops requested. However, estimates of McChrystal's request range from 10,000 to 45,000 troops. Paul Pillar, national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia during the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, dryly noted that if the administration requests the upper range then "the US will reach the level of the Russians at the peak of their deployment in the eighties: more than 100,000."
What Mission Can Be Accomplished?
The president has voiced some concerns about McChrystal's assessment. The Wall Street Journal reported in late September that "President Barack Obama...voiced skepticism that more troops would make a difference in Afghanistan, suggesting he might not rubber-stamp military officials' expected request to send more forces to that country."Aware of the controversy within the administration and the public, Obama has scheduled at least five meetings with his national security team over the next two weeks to reexamine the strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Adding further tension is yet another request for additional war spending that lawmakers in the House and Senate expect to complete in the next month.
But the question remains, even if McChrystal gets all of the troops he wants, is the mission possible? While it seems that a narrow mission that Obama proposed back in March to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan" could be within the grasp of the United States and NATO, McChrystal's counterinsurgency strategy seems unobtainable, even in his own review. He notes that the Afghan state is too weak to build the support needed for a robust counterinsurgency campaign and that NATO may not be well trained, equipped, or properly motivated for success.
Indeed, Afghanistan is causing many to question NATO's ability to last much beyond its 60th anniversary this year.
Furthermore, McChrystal's plan is highly dependent on the training of the Afghan National Army (ANA). Such training has been a dismal failure in the past eight years, even as the United States has spent $17.6 billion instructing the ANA. Saying that we now can do better is a dubious proposition at best. Rebuilding the Afghan military is no small task, no matter how many trainers McChrystal would like to send.
The alternative suggested by many of the earlier strategic reviews and now championed by Vice President Joe Biden, is to narrow the mission to focus on al-Qaeda and the Taliban, essentially calling for action to stop Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven for terrorists. Indeed, this is the counter-terrorism strategy that President Bush pursued with little success. The problem with even this more limited objective is that the United States or NATO could not achieve it without staying in Afghanistan forever. As long as the United States and NATO forces are there in great numbers, it won't be claimed as a safe haven. But when forces leave, al-Qaeda would simply return.
The inertia of the last eight years is hard to overcome. In some sense, it's more difficult with Democrats both in the White House and running Congress. If Obama were to withdraw from Afghanistan and an attack occurred against the United States, the party fears that it would stand accused of being weak on defense for another 40 years. On the other side of the coin, doubling down on George Bush's war by sending more troops and resources has little chance of success. Even if it did succeed, such a strategy would likely further damage the U.S. economy, military, and our standing in the world in the process.
Another option is needed on the table — a clear and measurable timetable for withdrawal.
Avoiding the Graveyard of Empires
Afghanistan has been far too often called the "Graveyard of Empires." Although the referenceapplies to a much different time in the world, it may be applicable once again since the only two options under discussion would not likely bring a successful conclusion to the war. General McChrystal's plan offers no timetable or exit strategy, beyond warning that the next 12-18 months are critical—a timeframe that New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman bandied about so freely in Iraq that estimates like McChrystal's became known as "Friedman Units." And Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has rejected outright a timetable for withdrawal. But with NATO partners Britain, France, and Germany calling for a timeline, this option should be examined more closely.The timetable that was set in Iraq indicates that such an approach can be useful in extricating the United States from a bad position. Most importantly, it begins to disarm the Taliban’s argument that the "occupiers" will never leave. Calling for a timetable for withdrawal also recognizes that at some point Afghanistan, like Iraq and almost all other wars, will end with a negotiated peace treaty.
Figuring out what that treaty should say and constructing a timetable to meet those conditions should be the next step in Afghanistan. Given the lack of legitimacy for the Karzai government and the relative political strength of the Taliban, negotiations must include a wide range of Afghans. Key principles for a treaty should include:
Deny al-Qaeda Safe Haven. Most analysts would argue that keeping Afghanistan (and other countries across the globe) free of al-Qaeda and terrorist networks should be a primary objective for global security. But the manner in which this can be achieved is under fierce debate. Occupation and options for open invasion whenever deemed necessary should be off the table. Instead, relying on the power in the United Nations Security Council and the provisions of Chapter VII provide nation states the opportunity to adequately protect themselves from imminent attack. Coupled with an international effort to track and capture members of terrorist networks, this should provide the United States and the international community with the strongest response possible. One primary example of this was the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was not nabbed in a military raid but by combined police work.
Too much of the debate has focused on who rules Afghanistan and not on our goal of isolating al-Qaeda. The United States shouldn’t try to determine who can be in the government, how it is chosen, or how it rules, so long as that government abides by an agreement not to harbor al-Qaeda, and to work with the international community to enforce that agreement. The Taliban itself is not a threat to the United States.
Commit to Development. Afghanistan is one of the most underdeveloped nations in the world. Funding for development so far has been far below needed levels. The country urgently needs basic infrastructure. Without roads, access to markets, better agricultural inputs, and available credit, local businesses can't start up or thrive. Such levels of commerce are needed to help combat the lucrative drug trade and raise the population out of poverty.
With few natural resources and a government highly dependent on international contributions, dedicated funding from the international community is needed. However, aid provided so far has not been successful. Too many projects are planned, designed, and implemented with far too little involvement from Afghans. Failure to learn from Greg Mortenson's book, Three Cups of Tea, where the success of Mortenson's development projects are dependent on working hand-in-hand with the local population, has doomed many of these projects. Aid should go directly to Afghan led organizations, coupled with strong auditing by international agencies.
Withdraw all Combat Troops. Foreign troops on the ground (and drone attacks from the air) have been the biggest irritant to Afghan citizens and have been the most important tool for recruiting in terrorist networks. A commitment to withdrawing all combat troops will help deflate the recruitment for these groups. While growing the Afghan National Army is critical for the security of Afghanistan, the lack of human rights training, measures of accountability, and most important, a central government to report to, has severely undermined the legitimacy of these troops. Further training must be refocused and fall under a common set of guidelines, including oversight under the Leahy Law that suspends training funding for any groups involved in human rights abuses.
Separate Pakistan from Afghanistan. No essay on Afghanistan these days seems to omit the problems arising in Pakistan. It is wrong to see the distinct challenges facing these two countries as one struggle and the U.S. history in Pakistan requires a far different approach. The United States must address directly with Pakistan the flow of al-Qaeda and the Taliban into that country.
Clearly there are other steps to be taken, but these are the most important and should be the starting point for negotiations. As much as the citizens of United States and the world want President Obama to succeed in fixing Afghanistan, the policies that are under discussion are most likely to put us one more "Friedman Unit" away from a resolution. With more civilians and soldiers bound to perish during that time, it's time for a fundamentally different approach — one that can greatly diminish the greatest threats to the United States and at the same time, start Afghanistan on the road to recovery.
Erik Leaver is the Policy Outreach Director for Foreign Policy In Focus and is a Research Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies.
123 Real Change
Bombing Afghanistan: Where Have All the Photos Gone - Sibel Edmonds, via Twitter
http://123realchange.blogspot.com
Mounting Civilian Casualties …Silently
The latest bombing in Afghanistan killed at least nine Afghan civilians, including six children. Here are a few excerpts from the report:
…
Now I am going to ask the same question: Where are these photographs in the no-coverage coverage of Afghan casualties by our simply despicable mainstream media? Why don’t they show us the real ugly face of our aimless, objective-less, but nonetheless vicious assault tagged as a War on Terror in Afghanistan?
Remember this picture from the Vietnam War?
The picture above, and many similar pictures and war footage, helped shape our public opinion in regard to another senseless war and vicious assaults on civilians. It helped open our people’s eyes to the real horrors of war. It led to mounting pressure from our people demanding an end to these atrocities.
Well, after searching and searching, and searching more I found only a couple of pictures depicting the real face of our war in Afghanistan. For reasons I am sure you all are aware of our corporate media-Government Joint Venture, and in fact many pseudo alternative ones, don’t want our public to see these pictures, since they would speak more than a thousand words and help shape opinions again.
Here is one of the ‘real faces’ of our war in Afghanistan:
Now I am going to ask you to join me and ask the MSM the same question: Where have all the photos gone?
A Few New Developments in The Makings of a Police State
What happened to the month of September?! For me, it just flew by: The Krikorian Case, the American Conservative Magazine article, the latest from former FBI CI Specialist John Cole, several interesting interviews for our upcoming Boiling Frogs Show, building and designing my soon-to-be-launched website…and of course full-time motherhood and my part time job. Well, I am still standing!
I am expecting to have the new site up and running by mid October. Since ‘blogger’ doesn’t have a forwarding function I’ll post the notice for the new site as my last post to direct our readers to the site. It’s not going to be just a new site but the beginning of a new exciting project. Once the move is completed and we are settled, I’ll announce the names of my investigative journalist partners whom you all will recognize, together with a few other projects and objectives.
I’ve been running behind in publishing my next series of Boiling Frogs Interviews. In the next few weeks I’ll post interviews with John Cole (Former FBI CI Specialist), Melvin Goodman (Former CIA Analyst), Richard Barlow (Former CIA Analyst), and Steve Kohn (Attorney & the Founder of National Whistleblowers Center).
Speaking of interviews, here is the transcript of a great interview by Scott Horton with Philip Giraldi and Joe Lauria based on the American Conservative Magazine cover story.
Here is some semi-recent news and developments related to our ‘Police State’ topics I’ve been meaning to post, but for one reason or another were unable to actually sit down and do:
President of words but not actions
Those of you who’ve been following the latest on the President’s half-hearted promises on the future of the State Secrets Privilege may want to check out his latest action in ‘action’ and ‘implementation.’ The informed civil libertarians have been cautioning against celebrating our Attorney General’s vague announcement of improvements in using and implementing this privilege. They are right. The changes are in words only and cosmetic at best. As we all know the new administration has been defending, justifying and actually promoting the former administration’s abuses of this unconstitutional privilege. Here is the latest case:
President Fights to Keep the Worst PATRIOT ACT Provisions Extended & Alive
Our ‘President of Change’ has done another flip on one of his many campaign promises. Now Mr. Obama is vehemently seeking to have Congress extend all three expiring provisions of the so very unpatriotic and un-American PATRIOT ACT.
This is from a report released on Monday, September 15:
I know my readers are too sophisticated and informed to need any explanation of these unconstitutional provisions, so I won’t provide any. Come on, even the least informed citizen of this country should shudder after reading the ‘lone wolf’ provision. It says it plain and simple: the government doesn’t need ANY cause WHATSOEVER to target a citizen whenever and wherever it chooses to go after him/her. Period.
Let’s go ahead and add this to the long list of President Obama’s ‘changes on change.’ If you haven’t read my piece on this topic, Two Sides of the Same Coin, here is the link:
I am afraid at this rate soon we may deservedly call our new president ‘Bush Dark.’ Let’s hope I am wrong…
Girl Scouts: From Cookies to Guns?
Part I of my Police State Series was on ‘The National Security Generation’. As a reminder here are a few excerpts from that piece:
Now the Department of Homeland Security has decided to expand their ‘Homeland Security Youth’ doctrinarian program. Their new target: Girl Scouts. They appear intent on replacing our little girl scouts’ cookies with guns and their old line community work with snitching and militancy:
The Homeland’s objective one: start them really young.
The Homeland’s Objective Two: Train and militarize for Homeland Security.
The Homeland’s Objective Three: Don’t forget the little girls.
Former FBI Official Confirms Buried Espionage & Corruption Cases
John M. Cole, a former FBI Counterintelligence and Counterespionage Manager, has publicly confirmed FBI’s decade long investigation of the former State Department Official. According to Cole, as in over one hundred cases involving Israeli espionage activities within the US government, this case too has been covered up and buried despite mountains of evidence collected.
Here is the public response from John Cole after the publication of The American Conservative magazine’s cover story:
Coming Soon: Boiling Frogs exclusive interview with John M Cole on his upcoming book and latest revelations
Mizgin's Desk Reports:
It would appear that the True Believers of the Democratic Party are a entering the State of Denial over the "relationship" of Democratic Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky with a female Turkish spy.
In spite of the congresswoman's claims that she has not been involved with the Turks, we know that in 2001, which is included in the time frame of wiretaps that Sibel Edmonds translated, Mehmet Celebi, of Hillary Clinton fame, donated $350 to Jan Schakowsky. Celebi was a fundraiser for another Chicago politician, Rahm Emanuel. Later, Celebi became a bundler for Hillary Clinton, raising $100,000 for her presidential campaign. She finally had to dump Celebi because of his role as producer of the Turkish film "Kurtlar Vadisi Irak".
Celebi held high-level positions within the Chicago-based Turkish American Cultural Association (TACA) and the Assembly of Turkish American Associations (ATAA). Both organizations had been "targets of an FBI counter-intelligence operation investigating the corruption and bribery of high-level US officials from 1997 onward." Furthermore, the Celebi family in Turkey has been involved in arms- and narcotics-dealing and Mehmet Celebi admits to having:
While Celebi was moving and shaking for the Democratic Party in Chicago, Schakowsky's husband, Robert Creamer, a political consultant, was under investigation for bank fraud. The investigation was ongoing in 1998, which was well within the timeframe of the FBI wiretaps from Chicago that Sibel Edmonds translated. It may very well be that Turkish agents targeted Schakowsky in order to obtain favors from her husband. As Sibel stated in The American Conservative interview:
Chicago has its connection to Susurluk, too. Abdullah Catli, a state assassin and narcotics trafficker, had long been a member of the Gray Wolves and was wanted by Interpol in the 1990s. Catli helped fellow Gray Wolf Mehmet Ali Agca escape from a Turkish military prison in 1979, just after Agca assassinated a newspaper editor but a few short years before he carried out the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II.
In 1989, Abdullah Catli, under the name Mehmet Ozbay, showed up at the Turkish consulate in Chicago to request a new passport. He showed up at the Chicago consulate for a second time in 1994 to pick up a new passport and request a new Turkish identity card. In 1995 he showed up a third time to request an extension of his required military service. It would also appear that Catli, as Ozbay, married an American, obtained a green card, and went on Interpol's wanted list during the time that he was in the US.
More interesting is that he was also reported to have been issued an American passport under the name Michael Nicholsan.
Therefore, it's pretty well established that one of Turkey's most notorious state assassins and narcotics traffickers lived close enough to Chicago to be compelled to use Chicago's Turkish consulate to obtain official documents.
In Vanity Fair's 2005 piece on the Sibel Edmonds case, the magazine clearly established the fact that the FBI named Chicago as the epicenter of Turkish corruption operations targeting US officials.
It's very difficult to believe that any politician from the Chicago area would have nothing to do with the Turkish community there. For Jan Schakowsky to deny any relationship would be utter foolishness, of course, because she's been very much involved lately with the Fethullah Gulen movement through the Chicago-based Niagara Foundation, whose honorary president is none other than Hocaefendi himself. This year Schakowsky wrote a Letter of Recognition for the Niagara Foundations 2009 "Peace and Dialogue Awards". And Schakowsky did the same in 2008 and in 2007.
Naturally, these facts raise questions. How intimately does Representative Schakowsky know the Niagara Foundation in order for her to show such consistent and strong support? What benefits does the Niagara Foundation provide Schakowsky and the City of Chicago? Since the Chicago City Council backs and promotes the Niagara Foundation, what is the foundation's real connection to Mayor Daly and former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, both of whom are involved in major, ongoing corruption cases?
Inquiring minds want to know.
But could there really be any problem here with Fethullah Gulen? He represents the Islamist trend in Turkey which has generally been at odds with the Nationalists, especially with the ultra-nationalists known as Gray Wolves, right? That's the simplistic explanation; the reality is far more complicated and would take us from Susurluk and Chicago to Ergenekon.
Inviting Ms. Schakowsky to Join…….
Dear Congresswoman Schakowsky:
It is an age-old tactic, when one cannot refute statements with facts, to attempt to discredit the witness. Rather than exchanging accusations, let me just go on record with facts and detailed citations.
When I became aware of incriminating evidence against high-level U.S. officials—elected and appointed—I filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and fought for five years in court. I bore tremendous cost, financially and emotionally, to make this data public. Here is the court case identification: C.A. No. 1:02CV01294 (ESH).
Few citizens have gone this far in a FOIA case to make covered-up information available to the public. No one gains financially from fighting this kind of thing in court, and I am no exception. You have called me a fantasist, but would a fabricator pay as dearly as I did to have her claims investigated?
I fought another court case to expose government criminality through key witnesses and documents. As in the FOIA case, I bore tremendous costs and was again blocked by the invocation of the State Secrets Privilege and National Security. The court case identification is Civ.No.1:02CV01448(JR)).
No other citizen has twice had the State Secrets Privilege invoked. But why would the government, with the support of congressional representatives, go to such lengths to quash, gag, and classify the files and operations in question if they were “fantasy, lies, and nonexistent” as you say?
I complied with the whistleblowing rule and took my case to the Office of the Inspector General and provided all of the information they allowed me to. They interviewed dozens of witnesses and reviewed hundreds of pages of documents in their investigation of my credibility and the validity of my case. Here is the link to their confirmation that I and my case have merit: DOJ-IG Report. Here is the redacted report that shows how our government censored more than 90% of this report to the public: Redacted DOJ-IG Report. Very few national security whistleblowers have been granted this level of validation and vindication. The Justice Department’s own Office of the Inspector General disagrees with your characterization of me and my case.
Several senior members of Congress—from both sides of the aisle--have also investigated and publicly confirmed my credibility and the grave nature of my disclosures. This is what Senator Leahy had to say: Leahy Statement. This is what Congresswoman Maloney said: Rep. Maloney Statement. Here are the assessments of Senator Lautenberg--Sen. Lautenberg Statement—and Senator Grassley--Sen. Grassley Statement. By attacking my credibility, you are also attacking your colleagues, including many on your side of the aisle. Are you accusing these senators and representatives of being fantasists too?
You have been described as a “true blue” civil libertarian, so it will surely interest you to know that the ACLU has declared me “the most gagged” person in the history of this great nation. Are you also attacking the ACLU and calling their characterization of this case a fantasy?
I have testified under oath, and my public biography will provide you with information about my educational background, financial background, and family life. I am fully aware of the consequences of perjury, and as you can see, I would have a lot to lose were that the case. I am sure you are familiar with my sworn testimony, but you can review it here.
I’ve done more than my share through the courts, IG offices, Congress, and media. I don’t have your power. You sit on the House Intelligence Committee, and you are one of the members of the majority party in Congress.
Here is what you can do: Call for an investigation and a hearing before your committee on this long covered-up case. Subpoena the files and call the witnesses. Bring in retired Special Agent Gilbert Graham and have him testify on the official report and complaint he filed with the DOJ inspector general in 2002 regarding the FBI counterespionage investigations involving Turkey and Israel in which targeted US representatives were illegally wiretapped. This is not fiction. Here is the official and signed public version: SA Gilbert Graham Report.
Also bring in former FBI Counterintelligence Operations Manager & Espionage Investigator John M. Cole and have him testify under oath regarding espionage cases involving State Department officials, Pentagon officials, and Congressional members. Here is a preview of some of the information disclosed and confirmed by Agent Cole: Interview and Radio Interview.
Also bring in the sworn testimonies of current FBI special agents in the Chicago and DC field offices who dutifully and patriotically led the counterintelligence operations on Turkey and corrupt US officials, only to see their investigations blocked and covered-up. Their names are public.
Order the Justice Department to release the two main Counterintelligence Operations Files on Turkey and “US persons of interest”—one from FBI Chicago Field Office-1996-2002, the other from FBI DC Field Office-1996-2001. These will help bring out the facts regarding your story too. I have documentation supporting the existence of these files.
Recall that I did not accuse you of any criminal or espionage-related activity.
The last time I saw a similar attack on my credibility was when Dennis Hastert issued a non-denial denial to information contained in a previous magazine article. He later gave up his seat, registered himself (under FARA) as an agent for the government of Turkey, and went on to collect $35,000 per month as a foreign agent. I certainly hope you are not planning to follow his footsteps by giving up your seat and officially registering with a foreign government. It would be far better if you used your position to bring out the facts. I will be delighted to assist you.
Sibel Edmonds
Scott Horton Interviews Phil Giraldi & Joe Lauria
Joe Lauria discusses his investigation of the case and confirmation of credibility by three FBI Agents with first-hand knowledge. Philip Giraldi expands upon the interview, and talks about the pseudo alternative media’s vested interests.
This is an excellent interview (as always) by Scott Horton of AntiWar Radio; loads of information for those in search of unbiased reporting. Here is the link.
UPDATE
The American Conservative Magazine cover story is now available online!
‘Who’s Afraid of Sibel Edmonds?’
The new issue of The American Conservative Magazine with a cover story on my case and an exclusive interview with me is now available. It is a ‘must read’ story exposing treason in high places.
Here is how the ACM describes it on their site:
This new issue is currently available to subscribers online at: http://amconmag.com/. The print copy will be out early next week.
The MIC-Foreign Lobby at Work
Luke Rosiak of Sunlight Foundation has published the second installment of his series on the Turkish Lobby. I strongly urge you to read it. Here are a few excerpts:
Here is a very ‘interesting’ player named by Rosiak: Hittite Microwave
Visit the site and read the entire piece here, and pay a lot of attention to ‘Hittite Microwave.’ In what context? Those of you who have followed my case and past interviews are very familiar with my using the label ‘Shady Turkish Front Companies.’
For now, let’s forget about the ‘classified’ and ‘buried’ aspects, and take a look at the following public information available on ‘Hittite Microwave’:
The Department of Commerce charged the multi-billion dollar company, Hittite Microwave, with 7 violations which occurred in 2000-2001:
Hittite Microwave accepted all charges and agreed to pay the imposed fine.
Now, let’s keep this thought, and go back and read a brief but very informative piece written by Philip Giraldi, the Retired CIA Officer who used to be stationed in Turkey. It’s a short piece, and here is the relevant paragraph for our purposes on this post:
Now, I want to present you with a related article on the Nuclear Black Market. It’s a lengthy article, so I will point out the relevant info:
Zeki Bilmen of Giza Technology was a Turkish Businessman. This important piece of information was omitted by LA Times, although they were well aware of it. Giza Technologies’ CEO Zeki Bilmen happened to be a much higher-level operator in this highly distorted LA Times story than even Karni. Citing this fact, mentioning the Turkish connection, and going after Giza Technologies, would have cost a lot when it came to our MIC, oil companies, certain elected and appointed officials, and the Turkish operatives and lobbyists in US.
Now, back to our multi-billion-dollar and highly connected Hittite Microwave. In those Department of Commerce violations case, Ayasli’s company was playing in the same game as Karni and Giza Technologies. Of course they got away with a slap on the wrist. Their protectors, our MIC + the State Department and Congressional guardian angels + the ‘lobby, made sure Hittite got off the hook and flourished even further under their protective umbrella.
Did the FBI notify the Department Commerce of it’s own files on Giza & Hittite? One wonders. How many people know about the relationship and business partnership between Hittite Microwave & Giza Technologies in the late 90s and early 2000? One wonders. Will we get to read further investigative reports on how the American Turkish Council (ATA) and ATAA facilitate these nuclear and illegal weapons market related operations via False End-User Certificates? I certainly hope so.
Again, I want to thank Sunlight Foundation for this excellent investigative piece. Let’s hope no one from the ‘establishment’ gets to them. I’ve seen it happen in the past. Please visit their site and show your support.
Please stay tuned for BREAKING NEWS tomorrow. I will need your support in having it disseminated. Please visit this site tomorrow for the latest.
The Joint Turkish-Israeli Lobby Forces
On September 10 Luke Rosiak of Sunlight Foundation wrote a thorough investigative piece on the Turkish lobby as it relates to the recent developments in the Schmidt v Krikorian case. Here is the best part of this expose:
The highlighted ‘contact’ will give you a little glimpse of ‘for sale ex-congressmen’ cashing in. Who do we have here specifically?
Not much surprise there, right? After all we’ve been paying attention to and covering a bit our Red Light District-turned-Congress. So let’s go to the part that never gets any coverage. You know, the area unanimously blacked out by our media.
The activated link for 2,260 will take you to the long-withheld ‘overt’ and ‘covert’ partnership and joint operations and lobbying between Turkish players and the Israeli-Jewish lobby. Please click and scan the list of Israeli lobbyists, their chapters, subchapters, distant chapters, hidden chapters…involved with Turkish lobby operations. Impressive list I reckon! Who do we have here:
AIPAC, JINSA, ADL, B’nai B’rith, JCPA, American Jewish Congress, American Jewish Committee, Jewish Council Public Affairs, Agudath Israel, Hadassah, Ohio Jewish Foundation, Seattle Jewish Leader, United Jewish Communities,… even Jewish Institute for National Security! I knew about the extremely active ominous Israel-Jewish lobby in the US, but I had no idea how many of these organizations, sister organizations, subchapters, hidden chapters… have been set up in the US!
Next, as I’ve said repeatedly, in many interviews, both overt and covert Turkish lobby and operations in the US were set up by AIPAC/JINSA by the Richard Perle-Douglas Feith duo. Here is their starting point: International Advisors Inc. After they were exposed, they shut it down and started ATC and ATAA, with all the other sister organizations, subchapters, hidden chapters…such as ATA-DC, ATA-Chicago, TACA, TABA…just like their Sister Israeli Lobby.
You may want to check out a couple of my interviews a few years back on this topic. There is one available on YouTube. An earlier one was during an interview with Scott Horton, which should be available in their archives.
I am thankful to Sunlight Foundation for making this data available to us - the citizens. For years I’ve been talking about the joint Turkey-Israel operations in the US targeted by FBI investigations but protected at the highest levels. The media, as they’ve very consistently done with any issue touching Israel-Turkey, never reported on these ties and operations. Also, since there was and is so very little information available on Turkey and related operations in the US (thanks to the Israel-driven media and publication industry), many people find it hard to understand or even believe. I understand there will be more coming from SF on this topic, so stay tuned and if you can, drop by their site and thank them for this service.
And here is the latest on the relevant Turkey & US Military Industrial Complex front:
This means until Congress approves the sale the ‘establishment’ is going to be ultra sensitive about anything that in any way touches Turkey related topics. That includes the pending Schmidt v Krikorian case, any visible article or editorial written on my testimony, any report issued by organizations like Sunlight Foundation…you get the point, right? You are looking at mega MIC corporations that have ‘a lot’ to lose if this deal is disturbed in any way. You have the fat lobby industry with tons at stake. You’ve got shady Turkish generals who will receive a big chunk of commissions once the deal is concrete. And of course we have the usual criminal and shady but semi invisible operatives involved who’ve been keeping the lid on the truth.
Meaning, that much more reason to follow and support the upcoming reports and investigative pieces by the Sunlight Foundation; monitor and disseminate developments in the Krikorian case (the MSM ain’t doing it; and we know very well why). And of course, keep visiting this site regularly since I’ll be posting significant developments and relevant information.
123 Real Change
Bombing Afghanistan: Where Have All the Photos Gone - Sibel Edmonds, via Twitter
http://123realchange.blogspot.com
Mounting Civilian Casualties …Silently
The latest bombing in Afghanistan killed at least nine Afghan civilians, including six children. Here are a few excerpts from the report:
- “Nine civilians including six children were killed in a NATO air strike targeting a Taliban position in restive southern Afghanistan, the provincial governor's office said on Thursday.”Six children and three women were killed and another three civilian men were wounded," he said.” … “Ehsanullah, an elder from Khoshal village, where the strike took place, earlier told AFP that Haji Kot Aka's house was hit late Wednesday."They had four guests at home when the bombing took place. The bomb killed Aka, his wife, four children and three of the guests. One of the guests was wounded," he said. Civilian casualties are a sensitive issue in Afghanistan, creating a rift between President Hamid Karzai's government and international forces as well as resentment on the ground against foreign troops.”
- Here is the first paragraph in a New York Times reporton May 15, 2009:
- “The number of civilians killed by the American air strikes in Farah Province last week may never be fully known. But villagers, including two girls recovering from burn wounds, described devastation that officials and human rights workers are calling the worst episode of civilian casualties in eight years of war in Afghanistan.”
- “Government officials have accepted handwritten lists compiled by the villagers of 147 dead civilians. An independent Afghan human rights group said it had accounts from interviews of 117 dead. American officials say that even 100 is an exaggeration but have yet to issue their own count.”
- “A copy of the government's list of the names, ages and father's names of each of the 140 dead was obtained by Reuters earlier this week. It shows that 93 of those killed were children -- the youngest eight days old -- and only 22 were adult males.”
…
Now I am going to ask the same question: Where are these photographs in the no-coverage coverage of Afghan casualties by our simply despicable mainstream media? Why don’t they show us the real ugly face of our aimless, objective-less, but nonetheless vicious assault tagged as a War on Terror in Afghanistan?
Remember this picture from the Vietnam War?
The picture above, and many similar pictures and war footage, helped shape our public opinion in regard to another senseless war and vicious assaults on civilians. It helped open our people’s eyes to the real horrors of war. It led to mounting pressure from our people demanding an end to these atrocities.
Well, after searching and searching, and searching more I found only a couple of pictures depicting the real face of our war in Afghanistan. For reasons I am sure you all are aware of our corporate media-Government Joint Venture, and in fact many pseudo alternative ones, don’t want our public to see these pictures, since they would speak more than a thousand words and help shape opinions again.
Here is one of the ‘real faces’ of our war in Afghanistan:
Now I am going to ask you to join me and ask the MSM the same question: Where have all the photos gone?
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Back to Business: Updates
A Few New Developments in The Makings of a Police State
What happened to the month of September?! For me, it just flew by: The Krikorian Case, the American Conservative Magazine article, the latest from former FBI CI Specialist John Cole, several interesting interviews for our upcoming Boiling Frogs Show, building and designing my soon-to-be-launched website…and of course full-time motherhood and my part time job. Well, I am still standing!
I am expecting to have the new site up and running by mid October. Since ‘blogger’ doesn’t have a forwarding function I’ll post the notice for the new site as my last post to direct our readers to the site. It’s not going to be just a new site but the beginning of a new exciting project. Once the move is completed and we are settled, I’ll announce the names of my investigative journalist partners whom you all will recognize, together with a few other projects and objectives.
I’ve been running behind in publishing my next series of Boiling Frogs Interviews. In the next few weeks I’ll post interviews with John Cole (Former FBI CI Specialist), Melvin Goodman (Former CIA Analyst), Richard Barlow (Former CIA Analyst), and Steve Kohn (Attorney & the Founder of National Whistleblowers Center).
Speaking of interviews, here is the transcript of a great interview by Scott Horton with Philip Giraldi and Joe Lauria based on the American Conservative Magazine cover story.
Here is some semi-recent news and developments related to our ‘Police State’ topics I’ve been meaning to post, but for one reason or another were unable to actually sit down and do:
President of words but not actions
Those of you who’ve been following the latest on the President’s half-hearted promises on the future of the State Secrets Privilege may want to check out his latest action in ‘action’ and ‘implementation.’ The informed civil libertarians have been cautioning against celebrating our Attorney General’s vague announcement of improvements in using and implementing this privilege. They are right. The changes are in words only and cosmetic at best. As we all know the new administration has been defending, justifying and actually promoting the former administration’s abuses of this unconstitutional privilege. Here is the latest case:
- The government's assertion of the state secrets privilege in a pending lawsuit brought by a former Drug Enforcement Administration agent will not be affected by the new Attorney General policy limiting the use of the privilege, the Justice Department said last week, because it is already in compliance with the new policy. In a September 24 appellate brief (pdf) in the case of Horn v. Huddle, Justice Department attorneys urged an appeals court to overturn a lower court ruling that would authorize the parties in the lawsuit to disclose classified information to their attorneys. The Department also defended its use of the state secrets privilege. An August 26 ruling in the case held that the parties' counsel had a "need to know" the classified information possessed by their clients, and the court therefore directed the government to authorize the sharing of that information. The government immediately objected. "The district court's extraordinary order -- compelling the government to grant security clearances and to authorize disclosure of classified national security information to private counsel... -- unnecessarily usurps the Executive Branch's authority and responsibility to protect from disclosure classified national security information as to which the state secrets privilege has been invoked," the government argued in its September 24 brief. The government also declared that the Attorney General's new policy limiting the use of the state secrets privilege, which takes effect on October 1, would have no impact on the present case. "The assertion of the privilege in this case satisfies the standards in the new policy concerning the applicable legal standards, narrow tailoring, and limitations on the assertion of the privilege. Moreover, the privilege as invoked in this case has been carefully reviewed by senior Department of Justice officials, who have determined that invocation of the privilege in this litigation is warranted," the government brief stated.
President Fights to Keep the Worst PATRIOT ACT Provisions Extended & Alive
Our ‘President of Change’ has done another flip on one of his many campaign promises. Now Mr. Obama is vehemently seeking to have Congress extend all three expiring provisions of the so very unpatriotic and un-American PATRIOT ACT.
This is from a report released on Monday, September 15:
- “Despite promises during the campaign that he would review certain of the most intrusive portions of the PATRIOT Act, President Barack Obama’s Justice Department today is calling for Congress to extend all three expiring provisions, though they were “willing to consider” civil rights protections “as long as they don’t weaken” the president’s powers under the act” Among those provisions the administration is seeking to extend is the infamous Section 215: the provision which allows law enforcement access to library and bookstore records, without probable cause, for “national security” reasons. The American Library Association has been complaining for years that the provision was overbroad and many fear it could prove to have a chilling effect on the ability to read potentially subversive literature. Another of the provisions the administration wants extended is the so-called “lone wolf” provision, which amends the FISA definition of “agent of a foreign power” to include people the government can’t establish as having any link to a foreign government or terrorist organization.”
I know my readers are too sophisticated and informed to need any explanation of these unconstitutional provisions, so I won’t provide any. Come on, even the least informed citizen of this country should shudder after reading the ‘lone wolf’ provision. It says it plain and simple: the government doesn’t need ANY cause WHATSOEVER to target a citizen whenever and wherever it chooses to go after him/her. Period.
Let’s go ahead and add this to the long list of President Obama’s ‘changes on change.’ If you haven’t read my piece on this topic, Two Sides of the Same Coin, here is the link:
I am afraid at this rate soon we may deservedly call our new president ‘Bush Dark.’ Let’s hope I am wrong…
Girl Scouts: From Cookies to Guns?
Part I of my Police State Series was on ‘The National Security Generation’. As a reminder here are a few excerpts from that piece:
- On May 15 this year Telegraph UK ran an article on a nationwide Boy Scouts training program on combating terrorism. The reported number of scouts between the ages of 14 and 21 who are currently enrolled in law enforcement and terrorism programs across the United States is around 35,000.
- “Dressed in combat fatigues and armed with air guns firing tiny plastic pellets, they are taught how to assault buses, raid marijuana fields and rescue terrorist hostages from buildings.”
- “the 90 ninth-graders who chose the new homeland security programthis last school year focused on topics torn from the headlines: Islamic jihadism, nuclear arms, cyber-crime, domestic militias and the like.”
Now the Department of Homeland Security has decided to expand their ‘Homeland Security Youth’ doctrinarian program. Their new target: Girl Scouts. They appear intent on replacing our little girl scouts’ cookies with guns and their old line community work with snitching and militancy:- “The United States wants to enlist its 3.4 million Girl Scouts in the effort to combat hurricanes, pandemics, terror attacks and other disasters.” “The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) launched a campaign Tuesday to entice the blue, brown and green-clad multitudes to be even more prepared, with the promise of a new patch if they pitch in.”
The Homeland’s objective one: start them really young.
The Homeland’s Objective Two: Train and militarize for Homeland Security.
The Homeland’s Objective Three: Don’t forget the little girls.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Grossman Confirmed as FBI Target in Espionage Investigations
Former FBI Official Confirms Buried Espionage & Corruption Cases
John M. Cole, a former FBI Counterintelligence and Counterespionage Manager, has publicly confirmed FBI’s decade long investigation of the former State Department Official. According to Cole, as in over one hundred cases involving Israeli espionage activities within the US government, this case too has been covered up and buried despite mountains of evidence collected.
Here is the public response from John Cole after the publication of The American Conservative magazine’s cover story:
- "I read the recent cover story by The American Conservative magazine. I applaud their courage in publishing this significant interview. I am fully aware of the FBI's decade-long investigation of the High-level State Department Official named in this article [Marc Grossman], which ultimately was buried and covered up. It is long past time to investigate this case and bring about accountability..."
- “John M. Cole, an FBI spy catcher who retired in 2004, says that from 1993 to 1995 alone, he had “125 open cases” of Israeli espionage, representing nearly half of all the investigations carried on in his Global Unit, part of the now-defunct National Security division.” Inside the FBI itself, Cole said, tracking suspected Israeli spies was hush-hush.In a sharp break with FBI procedures, he was prohibited from notifying field offices when an investigation crept into their jurisdictions. “No one was supposed to know we were investigating the Israelis,” Cole said.”
- “The 125 figure “makes sense,” another former top FBI counterintelligence official said, speaking only on condition that he not be identified because of the issue’s sensitivity. This official called the Israeli embassy’s denials “horse [manure].” In fact, he said, U.S. officials repeatedly warned the Israelis to back off. But the finger-wagging only seemed to energize them. “We would call them in, call them on the carpet, and next week there would be 10 more cases,” he said. The Justice Department never seemed much interested in prosecuting them, he and other counterintelligence veterans said. Agents would get pissed off,” said the former top official. “We knew they were going to walk, that they were going to get a pass. . . . It was frustrating.””
Coming Soon: Boiling Frogs exclusive interview with John M Cole on his upcoming book and latest revelations
Saturday, September 26, 2009
From Susurluk and Chicago to Ergenekon
Mizgin's Desk Reports:
It would appear that the True Believers of the Democratic Party are a entering the State of Denial over the "relationship" of Democratic Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky with a female Turkish spy.
In spite of the congresswoman's claims that she has not been involved with the Turks, we know that in 2001, which is included in the time frame of wiretaps that Sibel Edmonds translated, Mehmet Celebi, of Hillary Clinton fame, donated $350 to Jan Schakowsky. Celebi was a fundraiser for another Chicago politician, Rahm Emanuel. Later, Celebi became a bundler for Hillary Clinton, raising $100,000 for her presidential campaign. She finally had to dump Celebi because of his role as producer of the Turkish film "Kurtlar Vadisi Irak".
Celebi held high-level positions within the Chicago-based Turkish American Cultural Association (TACA) and the Assembly of Turkish American Associations (ATAA). Both organizations had been "targets of an FBI counter-intelligence operation investigating the corruption and bribery of high-level US officials from 1997 onward." Furthermore, the Celebi family in Turkey has been involved in arms- and narcotics-dealing and Mehmet Celebi admits to having:
" . . . worked in management capacity at some of the world's largest financial institutions and has provided financial guidance to many high-net worth individuals and celebrities as well as corporations. He has been consulting some of the largest corporations in Turkey on mergers and acquisitions in addition to international funds wishing to invest in Turkey and the region."
While Celebi was moving and shaking for the Democratic Party in Chicago, Schakowsky's husband, Robert Creamer, a political consultant, was under investigation for bank fraud. The investigation was ongoing in 1998, which was well within the timeframe of the FBI wiretaps from Chicago that Sibel Edmonds translated. It may very well be that Turkish agents targeted Schakowsky in order to obtain favors from her husband. As Sibel stated in The American Conservative interview:
They needed Schakowsky and her husband Robert Creamer to perform certain illegal operational facilitations for them in Illinois.
Chicago has its connection to Susurluk, too. Abdullah Catli, a state assassin and narcotics trafficker, had long been a member of the Gray Wolves and was wanted by Interpol in the 1990s. Catli helped fellow Gray Wolf Mehmet Ali Agca escape from a Turkish military prison in 1979, just after Agca assassinated a newspaper editor but a few short years before he carried out the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II.
In 1989, Abdullah Catli, under the name Mehmet Ozbay, showed up at the Turkish consulate in Chicago to request a new passport. He showed up at the Chicago consulate for a second time in 1994 to pick up a new passport and request a new Turkish identity card. In 1995 he showed up a third time to request an extension of his required military service. It would also appear that Catli, as Ozbay, married an American, obtained a green card, and went on Interpol's wanted list during the time that he was in the US.
More interesting is that he was also reported to have been issued an American passport under the name Michael Nicholsan.
Therefore, it's pretty well established that one of Turkey's most notorious state assassins and narcotics traffickers lived close enough to Chicago to be compelled to use Chicago's Turkish consulate to obtain official documents.
In Vanity Fair's 2005 piece on the Sibel Edmonds case, the magazine clearly established the fact that the FBI named Chicago as the epicenter of Turkish corruption operations targeting US officials.
It's very difficult to believe that any politician from the Chicago area would have nothing to do with the Turkish community there. For Jan Schakowsky to deny any relationship would be utter foolishness, of course, because she's been very much involved lately with the Fethullah Gulen movement through the Chicago-based Niagara Foundation, whose honorary president is none other than Hocaefendi himself. This year Schakowsky wrote a Letter of Recognition for the Niagara Foundations 2009 "Peace and Dialogue Awards". And Schakowsky did the same in 2008 and in 2007.
Naturally, these facts raise questions. How intimately does Representative Schakowsky know the Niagara Foundation in order for her to show such consistent and strong support? What benefits does the Niagara Foundation provide Schakowsky and the City of Chicago? Since the Chicago City Council backs and promotes the Niagara Foundation, what is the foundation's real connection to Mayor Daly and former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, both of whom are involved in major, ongoing corruption cases?
Inquiring minds want to know.
But could there really be any problem here with Fethullah Gulen? He represents the Islamist trend in Turkey which has generally been at odds with the Nationalists, especially with the ultra-nationalists known as Gray Wolves, right? That's the simplistic explanation; the reality is far more complicated and would take us from Susurluk and Chicago to Ergenekon.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
In Pursuit of the Facts
Inviting Ms. Schakowsky to Join…….
Dear Congresswoman Schakowsky:
It is an age-old tactic, when one cannot refute statements with facts, to attempt to discredit the witness. Rather than exchanging accusations, let me just go on record with facts and detailed citations.
When I became aware of incriminating evidence against high-level U.S. officials—elected and appointed—I filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and fought for five years in court. I bore tremendous cost, financially and emotionally, to make this data public. Here is the court case identification: C.A. No. 1:02CV01294 (ESH).
Few citizens have gone this far in a FOIA case to make covered-up information available to the public. No one gains financially from fighting this kind of thing in court, and I am no exception. You have called me a fantasist, but would a fabricator pay as dearly as I did to have her claims investigated?
I fought another court case to expose government criminality through key witnesses and documents. As in the FOIA case, I bore tremendous costs and was again blocked by the invocation of the State Secrets Privilege and National Security. The court case identification is Civ.No.1:02CV01448(JR)).
No other citizen has twice had the State Secrets Privilege invoked. But why would the government, with the support of congressional representatives, go to such lengths to quash, gag, and classify the files and operations in question if they were “fantasy, lies, and nonexistent” as you say?
I complied with the whistleblowing rule and took my case to the Office of the Inspector General and provided all of the information they allowed me to. They interviewed dozens of witnesses and reviewed hundreds of pages of documents in their investigation of my credibility and the validity of my case. Here is the link to their confirmation that I and my case have merit: DOJ-IG Report. Here is the redacted report that shows how our government censored more than 90% of this report to the public: Redacted DOJ-IG Report. Very few national security whistleblowers have been granted this level of validation and vindication. The Justice Department’s own Office of the Inspector General disagrees with your characterization of me and my case.
Several senior members of Congress—from both sides of the aisle--have also investigated and publicly confirmed my credibility and the grave nature of my disclosures. This is what Senator Leahy had to say: Leahy Statement. This is what Congresswoman Maloney said: Rep. Maloney Statement. Here are the assessments of Senator Lautenberg--Sen. Lautenberg Statement—and Senator Grassley--Sen. Grassley Statement. By attacking my credibility, you are also attacking your colleagues, including many on your side of the aisle. Are you accusing these senators and representatives of being fantasists too?
You have been described as a “true blue” civil libertarian, so it will surely interest you to know that the ACLU has declared me “the most gagged” person in the history of this great nation. Are you also attacking the ACLU and calling their characterization of this case a fantasy?
I have testified under oath, and my public biography will provide you with information about my educational background, financial background, and family life. I am fully aware of the consequences of perjury, and as you can see, I would have a lot to lose were that the case. I am sure you are familiar with my sworn testimony, but you can review it here.
I’ve done more than my share through the courts, IG offices, Congress, and media. I don’t have your power. You sit on the House Intelligence Committee, and you are one of the members of the majority party in Congress.
Here is what you can do: Call for an investigation and a hearing before your committee on this long covered-up case. Subpoena the files and call the witnesses. Bring in retired Special Agent Gilbert Graham and have him testify on the official report and complaint he filed with the DOJ inspector general in 2002 regarding the FBI counterespionage investigations involving Turkey and Israel in which targeted US representatives were illegally wiretapped. This is not fiction. Here is the official and signed public version: SA Gilbert Graham Report.
Also bring in former FBI Counterintelligence Operations Manager & Espionage Investigator John M. Cole and have him testify under oath regarding espionage cases involving State Department officials, Pentagon officials, and Congressional members. Here is a preview of some of the information disclosed and confirmed by Agent Cole: Interview and Radio Interview.
Also bring in the sworn testimonies of current FBI special agents in the Chicago and DC field offices who dutifully and patriotically led the counterintelligence operations on Turkey and corrupt US officials, only to see their investigations blocked and covered-up. Their names are public.
Order the Justice Department to release the two main Counterintelligence Operations Files on Turkey and “US persons of interest”—one from FBI Chicago Field Office-1996-2002, the other from FBI DC Field Office-1996-2001. These will help bring out the facts regarding your story too. I have documentation supporting the existence of these files.
Recall that I did not accuse you of any criminal or espionage-related activity.
The last time I saw a similar attack on my credibility was when Dennis Hastert issued a non-denial denial to information contained in a previous magazine article. He later gave up his seat, registered himself (under FARA) as an agent for the government of Turkey, and went on to collect $35,000 per month as a foreign agent. I certainly hope you are not planning to follow his footsteps by giving up your seat and officially registering with a foreign government. It would be far better if you used your position to bring out the facts. I will be delighted to assist you.
Sibel Edmonds
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
The American Conservative Article & the Credibility Question
Scott Horton Interviews Phil Giraldi & Joe Lauria
Joe Lauria discusses his investigation of the case and confirmation of credibility by three FBI Agents with first-hand knowledge. Philip Giraldi expands upon the interview, and talks about the pseudo alternative media’s vested interests.
This is an excellent interview (as always) by Scott Horton of AntiWar Radio; loads of information for those in search of unbiased reporting. Here is the link.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Exclusive Interview with Sibel Edmonds by The American Conservative Magazine
UPDATE
The American Conservative Magazine cover story is now available online!
‘Who’s Afraid of Sibel Edmonds?’
The new issue of The American Conservative Magazine with a cover story on my case and an exclusive interview with me is now available. It is a ‘must read’ story exposing treason in high places.
Here is how the ACM describes it on their site:
- There’s a new issue of The American Conservative going to press today, and it includes a story that will make more than a few congressmen and foreign lobbyists intensely uncomfortable: an in-depth interview between Phil Giraldi and FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds. She tells us exactly how Turkish intelligence have penetrated national secrets, suborned government officials, and blackmailed Congress. It’s going to be explosive.
This new issue is currently available to subscribers online at: http://amconmag.com/. The print copy will be out early next week.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Sunlight Foundation’s Second Exposรฉ: The Turkish Lobby
The MIC-Foreign Lobby at Work
Luke Rosiak of Sunlight Foundation has published the second installment of his series on the Turkish Lobby. I strongly urge you to read it. Here are a few excerpts:
- The Defense Department’s request last week for congressional approval of the sale of $8 billion worth of PAC-3 missiles to Turkey was the latest victory for a disparate group of interests including defense contractors, finance and energy corporations, trade groups, the Turkish government and a well-financed network of domestic advocacy groups. Intersecting interests have led them to join forces and lobby on a number of issues, including the characterization of distant historical events. Turkey and the domestic advocacy groups that promote the interests of Turkish-Americans did so to protect the Turkey’s image, while U.S. companies sought to bolster their own bottom lines. The efforts appear to have been successful for all the parties.
Here is a very ‘interesting’ player named by Rosiak: Hittite Microwave
- Turkey’s efforts have now been augmented by a domestic effort launched by a Turkish-American entrepreneur. Yalcin Ayasli founded Hittite Microwave in 1985 as a one-man company with a grant from the U.S. Air Force, and built the electronics company into a firm worth $1.2 billion, with half of its products sold overseas, according to a company presentation. The company had $180 million in revenue in 2008, according to SEC filings. Since 2004, Hittite Microwave has received roughly $30 million in contracts directly from the government—mostly to sponsor research and development—and has also done business with Lockheed Martin and other prime contractors, many of whom use Hittite electronics in their jets and other equipment, sold to both the U.S. military and Turkey. In 2007, Ayasli transferred $30 million in stock to fund a new endeavor, the nonprofit Turkish Coalition of America. The organization is headquartered in a Washington suite that has also been listed as the address for the Turkish Coalition USA PAC, the lobbying firm of Lydia Borland (who has represented the Turkish government), and the law firm of Bruce Fein and Associates (Fein comprises half of the Turkish American Legal Defense Fund).
Visit the site and read the entire piece here, and pay a lot of attention to ‘Hittite Microwave.’ In what context? Those of you who have followed my case and past interviews are very familiar with my using the label ‘Shady Turkish Front Companies.’
For now, let’s forget about the ‘classified’ and ‘buried’ aspects, and take a look at the following public information available on ‘Hittite Microwave’:
The Department of Commerce charged the multi-billion dollar company, Hittite Microwave, with 7 violations which occurred in 2000-2001:
- 6 Violations of Exporting Items without the Required Licenses, and 1 Violation of False Statement on Shipper’s Export Declaration Concerning Authority to Export
Hittite Microwave accepted all charges and agreed to pay the imposed fine.
Now, let’s keep this thought, and go back and read a brief but very informative piece written by Philip Giraldi, the Retired CIA Officer who used to be stationed in Turkey. It’s a short piece, and here is the relevant paragraph for our purposes on this post:
- Investigators are also looking at Israel’s particular expertise in the illegal sale of US military technology to countries like China and India. Fraudulent end-user certificates produced by Defense Ministries in Israel and Turkey are all that is needed to divert military technology to other, less benign, consumers.
Now, I want to present you with a related article on the Nuclear Black Market. It’s a lengthy article, so I will point out the relevant info:
- Karni then contacted Zeki Bilmen, head of Giza Technologies of Secaucus, N.J. On Aug. 6, Giza ordered 200 of the switches from PerkinElmer for $89,400, submitting certificates saying they would be used in a Soweto, South Africa, hospital. … Traffickers frequently ship restricted U.S. items to Dubai, Malta and other unrestricted trade zones worldwide and then re-export them to third countries to hide the origin or destination and avoid laws aimed at curbing nuclear proliferation, authorities say. … Giza, which had certified to PerkinElmer that the switches were for hospital use, sent them to Karni's Cape Town office by declaring them "electrical splices and couplings for switchings," which don't require an export license, Brigham's affidavit says. Providing such false or misleading information is a violation of federal law, he noted. … In court records, authorities said Karni often sent air freight to Pakistan and that he either completed or discussed other suspicious deals. In one, Karni bought for Khan a type of sophisticated oscilloscope often used in nuclear weapons and military programs, also through Giza. … Bilmen, of Giza Technologies, has not been charged. His lawyer, Robert C. Herbst, said Giza employees "were a victim of Asher Karni as much as anyone else was."
Zeki Bilmen of Giza Technology was a Turkish Businessman. This important piece of information was omitted by LA Times, although they were well aware of it. Giza Technologies’ CEO Zeki Bilmen happened to be a much higher-level operator in this highly distorted LA Times story than even Karni. Citing this fact, mentioning the Turkish connection, and going after Giza Technologies, would have cost a lot when it came to our MIC, oil companies, certain elected and appointed officials, and the Turkish operatives and lobbyists in US.
Now, back to our multi-billion-dollar and highly connected Hittite Microwave. In those Department of Commerce violations case, Ayasli’s company was playing in the same game as Karni and Giza Technologies. Of course they got away with a slap on the wrist. Their protectors, our MIC + the State Department and Congressional guardian angels + the ‘lobby, made sure Hittite got off the hook and flourished even further under their protective umbrella.
Did the FBI notify the Department Commerce of it’s own files on Giza & Hittite? One wonders. How many people know about the relationship and business partnership between Hittite Microwave & Giza Technologies in the late 90s and early 2000? One wonders. Will we get to read further investigative reports on how the American Turkish Council (ATA) and ATAA facilitate these nuclear and illegal weapons market related operations via False End-User Certificates? I certainly hope so.
Again, I want to thank Sunlight Foundation for this excellent investigative piece. Let’s hope no one from the ‘establishment’ gets to them. I’ve seen it happen in the past. Please visit their site and show your support.
Please stay tuned for BREAKING NEWS tomorrow. I will need your support in having it disseminated. Please visit this site tomorrow for the latest.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Sunlight Foundation’s Exposรฉ of the Turkish Lobby
The Joint Turkish-Israeli Lobby Forces
On September 10 Luke Rosiak of Sunlight Foundation wrote a thorough investigative piece on the Turkish lobby as it relates to the recent developments in the Schmidt v Krikorian case. Here is the best part of this expose:
- “Lobbyists for the government of Turkey, including former congressmen Bob Livingston, made more than 2,260 contacts with officials in an unparalleled push to quash a resolution in Congress that would deem the events genocide.”
The highlighted ‘contact’ will give you a little glimpse of ‘for sale ex-congressmen’ cashing in. Who do we have here specifically?
- Ex Congressman, Former Speaker of the House, Bob Livingston serving his foreign masters with his lobby firm ‘Livingston Group.’ A bit of background hereandhere. A group of ex congressmen, including Dick Gephardt and our many-times exposed scandalous ex Congressman, Former Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, with their lobby firm ‘DLA Piper.’ For a bit of background on this seehereand here.
Not much surprise there, right? After all we’ve been paying attention to and covering a bit our Red Light District-turned-Congress. So let’s go to the part that never gets any coverage. You know, the area unanimously blacked out by our media.
The activated link for 2,260 will take you to the long-withheld ‘overt’ and ‘covert’ partnership and joint operations and lobbying between Turkish players and the Israeli-Jewish lobby. Please click and scan the list of Israeli lobbyists, their chapters, subchapters, distant chapters, hidden chapters…involved with Turkish lobby operations. Impressive list I reckon! Who do we have here:
AIPAC, JINSA, ADL, B’nai B’rith, JCPA, American Jewish Congress, American Jewish Committee, Jewish Council Public Affairs, Agudath Israel, Hadassah, Ohio Jewish Foundation, Seattle Jewish Leader, United Jewish Communities,… even Jewish Institute for National Security! I knew about the extremely active ominous Israel-Jewish lobby in the US, but I had no idea how many of these organizations, sister organizations, subchapters, hidden chapters… have been set up in the US!
Next, as I’ve said repeatedly, in many interviews, both overt and covert Turkish lobby and operations in the US were set up by AIPAC/JINSA by the Richard Perle-Douglas Feith duo. Here is their starting point: International Advisors Inc. After they were exposed, they shut it down and started ATC and ATAA, with all the other sister organizations, subchapters, hidden chapters…such as ATA-DC, ATA-Chicago, TACA, TABA…just like their Sister Israeli Lobby.
You may want to check out a couple of my interviews a few years back on this topic. There is one available on YouTube. An earlier one was during an interview with Scott Horton, which should be available in their archives.
I am thankful to Sunlight Foundation for making this data available to us - the citizens. For years I’ve been talking about the joint Turkey-Israel operations in the US targeted by FBI investigations but protected at the highest levels. The media, as they’ve very consistently done with any issue touching Israel-Turkey, never reported on these ties and operations. Also, since there was and is so very little information available on Turkey and related operations in the US (thanks to the Israel-driven media and publication industry), many people find it hard to understand or even believe. I understand there will be more coming from SF on this topic, so stay tuned and if you can, drop by their site and thank them for this service.
And here is the latest on the relevant Turkey & US Military Industrial Complex front:
- U.S. eyes $7.8 billion missile sale to Turkey WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Obama administration has notified Congress of a possible $7.8 billion sale of Patriot PAC-3 antimissile batteries and related gear to Turkey, the only NATO ally bordering Iran. The sale would include 13 Patriot "fire units," 72 Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missiles and a range of associated hardware for ground-based air defense, the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency said in a notice made public Friday. It estimated the cost at $7.8 billion, which would be one of the biggest U.S. government-to-government arms sales in years and would mark a return of Turkey as a major U.S. arms buyer. …. The primary contractors for the Turkish sale would be Raytheon Co and Lockheed Martin Corp. The notice of a potential sale is required by law. It does not mean a sale has been concluded. In the case of a NATO member such as Turkey, Congress has 15 days to block a proposed arms deal by passing a joint resolution of disapproval, though it never has stopped a sale once formally notified. The proposed supply of the equipment to Turkey, along with U.S. logistical support, would not alter the basic military balance in the region, the notice to Congress said.
This means until Congress approves the sale the ‘establishment’ is going to be ultra sensitive about anything that in any way touches Turkey related topics. That includes the pending Schmidt v Krikorian case, any visible article or editorial written on my testimony, any report issued by organizations like Sunlight Foundation…you get the point, right? You are looking at mega MIC corporations that have ‘a lot’ to lose if this deal is disturbed in any way. You have the fat lobby industry with tons at stake. You’ve got shady Turkish generals who will receive a big chunk of commissions once the deal is concrete. And of course we have the usual criminal and shady but semi invisible operatives involved who’ve been keeping the lid on the truth.
Meaning, that much more reason to follow and support the upcoming reports and investigative pieces by the Sunlight Foundation; monitor and disseminate developments in the Krikorian case (the MSM ain’t doing it; and we know very well why). And of course, keep visiting this site regularly since I’ll be posting significant developments and relevant information.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=c386e645-b1c7-4c19-b5fc-3c74ab2b10c6)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment