My new book, ‘Chasing The Scream’, is now available
11 years ago
Monday, 7 June 2010
An outrageous lie - what Condoleeza knew
• Sibel Edmonds, a Turkish-American translator for the FBI, gave to the 9/11 Commission information she said proves senior government officials knew of al-Qaeda's plans to attack the U.S. with aircraft months before the airliners hit. She said National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice's denial of the data is "an outrageous lie."
Flashback: An Open Letter to the 9/11 Panel
by Sibel Edmonds - Whitsleblower
Thomas Kean, Chairman
National Committee on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
301 7th Street, SW
Room 5125
Washington, D.C. 20407
Dear Chairman Kean:
It has been almost three years since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, during which time we have been placed under a constant threat of terror and asked to exercise vigilance in our daily lives. Your commission was created by law to investigate "facts and circumstances related to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001" and to "provide recommendations to safeguard against future acts of terrorism," and has now issued its "9/11 Commission Report" [pdf]. You are now asking us to pledge our support for this report and its recommendations with our tax money, our security and our lives. Unfortunately, I find your report seriously flawed in its failure to address serious intelligence issues that I, as a witness to the commission, made you aware of. Thus, I must assume that other serious issues I am not aware of were also omitted from your report. These omissions cast doubt on the validity of your report and therefore on its conclusions and recommendations. Considering what is at stake – our national security – we are entitled to demand answers to unanswered questions, and to ask for clarification of issues that were ignored and omitted from the report. I, Sibel Edmonds, a concerned American citizen, a former FBI translator, a whistleblower, a witness for a United States Congressional investigation, a witness and a plaintiff for the Department of Justice Inspector General investigation and a witness for your own 9/11 Commission, request your response to the following questions and issues.
After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, we, the translators at the FBI's largest and most important translation unit, were told to slow down or even stop translation of critical information related to terrorist activities so that the FBI could present the United States Congress with a record of an "extensive backlog of untranslated documents" and justify its request for budget and staff increases. While FBI agents from various field offices were desperately seeking leads and suspects, and completely depending on FBI HQ and its language units to provide them with needed translations, hundreds of translators were being told by their administrative supervisors not to translate and to let the work pile up (please refer to the CBS 60 Minutes transcript from October 2002 provided to your investigators in January-February 2004). This issue has been confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee (please refer to Sen. Grassley's and Sen. Leahy's letters during the summer of 2002, provided to your investigators in January-February 2004). Apparently, this confirmed report has been substantiated by the Department of Justice Inspector General Report (please refer to DOJ-IG report "Re: Sibel Edmonds and FBI Translation," provided to you prior to the completion of your report). I provided your investigators with a detailed acount of this issue and the names of other witnesses willing to corroborate this (please refer to tape-recorded 3.5 hours testimony by Sibel Edmonds, provided to your investigators on Feb. 11, 2004).
Today, almost three years after 9/11, and more than two years since this information has been confirmed and made available to our government, the administrators in charge of language departments of the FBI remain in their positions and in charge of the information front lines of the FBI's counterterrorism and counterintelligence efforts. Your report omits any reference to this most serious issue, foregoing any accountability whatsoever, and your recommendations refrain from addressing this issue, which will have even more serious consequences. This issue is systemic and departmental. Why does your report exclude this information despite the evidence and briefings you received? How can budget increases address and resolve this misconduct by mid-level bureaucratic management? How can the addition of a new bureaucrat, the "intelligence czar," in a cocoon away from the action, address and resolve this problem?
Melek Can Dickerson, a Turkish translator, was hired by the FBI after Sept. 11 and placed in charge of translating the most sensitive information related to terrorists and criminals under the Bureau's investigation. Dickerson was granted top secret clearance, which can be granted only after conducting a thorough background investigation. Dickerson used to work for semi-legit organizations that were FBI targets of investigation. She had ongoing relationships with two individuals who were FBI targets of investigation. For months, Dickerson blocked all-important information related to these semi-legit organizations and the individuals she and her husband associated with. She stamped hundreds, if not thousands, of documents related to these targets as "not pertinent." Dickerson attempted to prevent others from translating these documents important to the FBI's investigations and our fight against terrorism. With the assistance of her direct supervisor, Mike Feghali, she took hundreds of pages of top-secret intelligence documents outside the FBI to unknown recipients. With Feghali's assistance, she forged signatures on top-secret documents related to 9/11 detainees. After all these incidents were confirmed and reported to FBI management, Melek Can Dickerson was allowed to remain in her position, to continue the translation of sensitive intelligence received by the FBI, and to maintain her top-secret clearance. Apparently bureaucratic mid-level FBI management and administrators decided that it would not look good for the Bureau to have this security breach and espionage case investigated and publicized, especially after the Robert Hanssen scandal. The Melek Can Dickerson case was confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee. It received major coverage by the press. According to Director Robert Mueller, the inspector general criticized the FBI for failing to adequately pursue the espionage report on Melek Can Dickerson. I provided your investigators with a detailed and specific account of this issue, the names of other witnesses willing to corroborate this, and additional documents.
Today, more than two years since the Dickerson incident was reported to the FBI, and more than two years since this information was confirmed by the United States Congress and reported by the press, the same people remain in charge of translation quality and security. Dickerson and several FBI targets of investigation hastily left the United States in 2002, and no criminal investigation has been opened. Not only does the supervisor who facilitated this criminal conduct remain in a supervisory position, he has been promoted to supervising Arabic language units of the FBI's counterterrorism and counterintelligence investigations. Your report omits these significant incidents, and your recommendations do not address this serious security breach and likely espionage issue. This issue needs to be investigated and prosecuted. The translation of our intelligence is being entrusted to individuals with loyalties to our enemies. Important "chit-chats" and "chatters" are being intentionally blocked from translation. Why does your report exclude this information and these serious issues despite the evidence and briefings you received? How can budget increases address and resolve this misconduct by mid-level bureaucratic management? How can the addition of an "intelligence czar" solve this problem?
More than four months prior to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, in April 2001, a long-term FBI informant/asset who had been providing the bureau with information since 1990, provided two FBI agents and a translator with specific information regarding a terrorist attack being planned by Osama bin Laden. This asset/informant was previously a high-level intelligence officer in Iran in charge of intelligence from Afghanistan. Through his contacts in Afghanistan, he received information that: 1) Osama bin Laden was planning a major terrorist attack in the United States targeting four or five major cities; 2) the attack was going to involve airplanes; 3) some of the individuals in charge of carrying out this attack were already in place in the United States; 4) the attack was going to be carried out soon, in a few months. The agents who received this information reported it to their superior, Special Agent in Charge of Counterterrorism Thomas Frields at the FBI Washington Field Office, by filing 302 forms, and the translator translated and documented this information. No action was taken by the special agent in charge, and after 9/11 the agents and the translators were told to "keep quiet" regarding this issue. The translator who was present during the session with the FBI informant, Mr. Behrooz Sarshar, reported this incident to Director Mueller in writing, and later to the Department of Justice Inspector General. The press reported this incident, and a report in the Chicago Tribune on July 21, 2004, stated that FBI officials had confirmed that this information was received in April 2001. Furthermore, the Chicago Tribune quoted an aide to Director Mueller saying that Mueller was surprised that the Commission never raised this particular issue with him during the hearing. Mr. Sarshar reported this issue to your investigators on Feb. 12, 2004, and provided them with specific dates, locations, witness names, and contact information for that particular Iranian asset and the two special agents who received the information (please refer to the tape-recorded testimony provided by Mr. Sarshar on February 12, 2004 and given to your investigators). I provided your investigators with a detailed and specific account of this issue, the names of other witnesses, and documents I had seen. Mr. Sarshar also provided the Department of Justice Inspector General with specific information regarding this issue (please refer to DOJ-IG report "Re: Sibel Edmonds and FBI Translation," provided to you prior to the completion of your report).
Almost three years after Sept. 11, many officials still refuse to admit to having specific information regarding the terrorists' plans to attack the United States. The Phoenix Memo, received months prior to the 9/11 attacks, specifically warned FBI HQ of pilot training and its possible link to terrorist activities against the United States. Four months prior to the terrorist attacks, the Iranian asset provided the FBI with specific information regarding the "use of airplanes," "major U.S. cities as targets," and "Osama bin Laden issuing the order." Coleen Rowley likewise reported that specific information had been provided to FBI HQ. All this information went to the same place: FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C., and the FBI Washington Field Office in Washington, D.C. Yet your report claims that not having a central place where all intelligence could be gathered was one of the main factors in our intelligence failure. Why does your report exclude the information regarding the Iranian asset and Behrooz Sarshar from its timeline of missed opportunities? Why was this significant incident not mentioned, despite the public confirmation by the FBI, witnesses provided to your investigators, and briefings you received directly? Why did you surprise even Director Mueller by not asking him questions regarding this significant incident? (Please remember that you ran out of questions to ask during your hearings with Director Mueller and AG John Ashcroft, so please do not cite a "time limit.") How can budget increases remedy the failures of mid-level bureaucrats at FBI Headquarters? How can the addition of an "intelligence czar" fix this problem?
Over two years ago, and after two unclassified sessions with FBI officials, the Senate Judiciary Committee sent letters to Director Mueller, Attorney General Ashcroft, and Inspector General Glenn Fine regarding the existence of unqualified translators in charge of translating high-level sensitive intelligence. The FBI confirmed at least one case: Kevin Taskesen, a Turkish translator, had been given a job as an FBI translator, despite the fact that he had failed all FBI language proficiency tests. In fact, Kevin could not understand or speak even elementary-level English. He had failed English proficiency tests and did not even score sufficiently in the target language. Still, Kevin Taskesen was hired, not due to a lack of other qualified translator candidates, but because his wife worked at FBI HQ as a language proficiency exam administrator. Almost everyone at FBI HQ and the FBI Washington Field Office knew about Kevin. Yet, Kevin was given the task of translating the most sensitive terrorist-related information, and he was sent to Guantanamo Bay to translate the interrogation of and information for all Turkic language detainees (Turks, Uzbeks, Turkmens, etc.). The FBI was supposed to be trying to obtain information regarding possible future attack plans from these detainees, yet the FBI knowingly sent unqualified translators to gather and translate this information. Furthermore, these detainees were either released, detained or prosecuted based on translations by unqualified translators knowingly sent there by the FBI. Sen. Grassley and Sen. Leahy publicly confirmed Kevin Taskesen's case (please refer to Senate letters and documents provided to your investigators in January-February 2004). The program 60 Minutes showed Kevin's picture and listed him as one of the unqualified translators sent to Guantanamo Bay, as confirmed by the FBI. The Department of Justice Inspector General provided a detailed account of these problems. I provided your investigators with a specific account of this issue and the names of other witnesses willing to corroborate this.
After over two years since Kevin Taskesen's case was publicly confirmed, and after almost two years since 60 Minutes broadcast Taskesen's case, Kevin Taskesen remains in his position as sole Turkish and Turkic language translator for the FBI Washington Field Office. After admitting that Kevin Taskesen was not qualified to translate sensitive intelligence and investigation of terrorist activities, the FBI still keeps him in charge of translating highly sensitive documents and leads. Those individuals in the FBI hiring department who facilitated the hiring of unqualified translators due to nepotism/cronyism remain in their positions. Yet your report does not mention this case or the chronic problems within the FBI translation, hiring and screening departments. Accountability for those responsible for these practices that endanger our national security is not brought up even once in your report. Why does your report exclude these serious issues despite the evidence and briefings you received?
In October 2001, approximately one month after the Sept. 11 attack, an agent returned a certain document to the FBI Washington Field Office to have it re-translated. This special agent rightfully believed that, considering the suspect under surveillance and the issues involved, the original translation might have missed information that could prove valuable in the investigation of terrorist activities. After this document was received by the FBI Washington Field Office and re-translated verbatim, the field agent's hunch appeared to be correct. The new translation revealed certain information regarding blueprints, pictures and building material for skyscrapers being sent overseas. It also revealed illegal activities in obtaining visas from certain embassies in the Middle East through network contacts and bribery. However, after the re-translation was completed and the new significant information revealed, the unit supervisor in charge of certain Middle Eastern languages, Mike Feghali, decided NOT to send the re-translated information to the special agent who had requested it. Instead, Feghali sent the agent a note stating that the translation was reviewed and that the original translation was accurate. Feghali argued that sending the accurate translation would hurt the original translator and would cause problems for the FBI language department. The special agent never received an accurate translation of that document. I provided your investigators with a detailed and specific account of this issue, the name and date of this particular investigation, and the names of other witnesses willing to corroborate this. This information was also provided to the Department of Justice Inspector General.
Only one month after the catastrophic events of Sept. 11, while many agents were working around the clock to obtain leads and information, the bureaucratic administrators in the FBI's largest and most important translation unit were covering up their past failures, blocking important leads and information, and jeopardizing ongoing terrorist investigations. The supervisor involved in this incident, Mike Feghali, was in charge of important Middle Eastern languages within the FBI Washington Field Office, and had a record of previous misconduct. After this supervisor's prior misconduct was reported to the FBI's higher-level management, the Inspector General's Office, the United States Congress, and the 9/11 Commission, he was promoted to supervisor of the FBI's Arabic language unit. Today, Mike Feghali remains in the FBI Washington Field Office and is in charge of a language unit receiving the chit-chat that our color-coded threat system is based upon. Yet your report contains zero information regarding these systemic problems that led us to our failure in preventing the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In your report, there are no references to individuals responsible for hindering past and current investigations, or those who are willing to compromise our security and our lives for their career advancement and security. Why does your report exclude this information despite all the evidence and briefings you received?
The latest buzz topic regarding intelligence is the problem of sharing information within and between intelligence agencies. The public has still not been told of the intentional obstruction of intelligence. The public has not been told that certain information, despite its relevance to terrorist activities, is not shared with counterterrorism units. This was true prior to 9/11, and it remains true today. If counterintelligence receives information about terrorism that implicates certain nations, semi-legit organizations or the politically powerful in this country, then that information is not shared with counterterrorism, regardless of the consequences. In certain cases, frustrated FBI agents have cited "direct pressure by the State Department." The Department of Justice Inspector General received detailed evidence regarding this issue. I provided your investigators with an account of this issue, the names of other witnesses willing to corroborate this, and the names of U.S. officials involved in these transactions and activities.
After almost three years, the American people still do not know that thousands of lives are jeopardized under apolicy of "protecting certain foreign business relations." The victims' family members still do not realize that answers they have sought relentlessly for over two years have been blocked in the interest of "safeguarding certain diplomatic relations." Your hearings and your report did not even attempt to address these unspoken, unwritten practices, although, unlike me, you were not placed under any gag. Despite your full awareness of criminal conduct by high-level government employees, you have not proposed criminal investigations, even though you are required to do so. How can budget increases resolve these problems when some of them are caused by unspoken practices and unwritten policies? How can an "intelligence czar" override these policies and practices?
Thomas Kean, Chairman
National Committee on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
301 7th Street, SW
Room 5125
Washington, D.C. 20407
Dear Chairman Kean:
It has been almost three years since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, during which time we have been placed under a constant threat of terror and asked to exercise vigilance in our daily lives. Your commission was created by law to investigate "facts and circumstances related to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001" and to "provide recommendations to safeguard against future acts of terrorism," and has now issued its "9/11 Commission Report" [pdf]. You are now asking us to pledge our support for this report and its recommendations with our tax money, our security and our lives. Unfortunately, I find your report seriously flawed in its failure to address serious intelligence issues that I, as a witness to the commission, made you aware of. Thus, I must assume that other serious issues I am not aware of were also omitted from your report. These omissions cast doubt on the validity of your report and therefore on its conclusions and recommendations. Considering what is at stake – our national security – we are entitled to demand answers to unanswered questions, and to ask for clarification of issues that were ignored and omitted from the report. I, Sibel Edmonds, a concerned American citizen, a former FBI translator, a whistleblower, a witness for a United States Congressional investigation, a witness and a plaintiff for the Department of Justice Inspector General investigation and a witness for your own 9/11 Commission, request your response to the following questions and issues.
After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, we, the translators at the FBI's largest and most important translation unit, were told to slow down or even stop translation of critical information related to terrorist activities so that the FBI could present the United States Congress with a record of an "extensive backlog of untranslated documents" and justify its request for budget and staff increases. While FBI agents from various field offices were desperately seeking leads and suspects, and completely depending on FBI HQ and its language units to provide them with needed translations, hundreds of translators were being told by their administrative supervisors not to translate and to let the work pile up (please refer to the CBS 60 Minutes transcript from October 2002 provided to your investigators in January-February 2004). This issue has been confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee (please refer to Sen. Grassley's and Sen. Leahy's letters during the summer of 2002, provided to your investigators in January-February 2004). Apparently, this confirmed report has been substantiated by the Department of Justice Inspector General Report (please refer to DOJ-IG report "Re: Sibel Edmonds and FBI Translation," provided to you prior to the completion of your report). I provided your investigators with a detailed acount of this issue and the names of other witnesses willing to corroborate this (please refer to tape-recorded 3.5 hours testimony by Sibel Edmonds, provided to your investigators on Feb. 11, 2004).
Today, almost three years after 9/11, and more than two years since this information has been confirmed and made available to our government, the administrators in charge of language departments of the FBI remain in their positions and in charge of the information front lines of the FBI's counterterrorism and counterintelligence efforts. Your report omits any reference to this most serious issue, foregoing any accountability whatsoever, and your recommendations refrain from addressing this issue, which will have even more serious consequences. This issue is systemic and departmental. Why does your report exclude this information despite the evidence and briefings you received? How can budget increases address and resolve this misconduct by mid-level bureaucratic management? How can the addition of a new bureaucrat, the "intelligence czar," in a cocoon away from the action, address and resolve this problem?
Melek Can Dickerson, a Turkish translator, was hired by the FBI after Sept. 11 and placed in charge of translating the most sensitive information related to terrorists and criminals under the Bureau's investigation. Dickerson was granted top secret clearance, which can be granted only after conducting a thorough background investigation. Dickerson used to work for semi-legit organizations that were FBI targets of investigation. She had ongoing relationships with two individuals who were FBI targets of investigation. For months, Dickerson blocked all-important information related to these semi-legit organizations and the individuals she and her husband associated with. She stamped hundreds, if not thousands, of documents related to these targets as "not pertinent." Dickerson attempted to prevent others from translating these documents important to the FBI's investigations and our fight against terrorism. With the assistance of her direct supervisor, Mike Feghali, she took hundreds of pages of top-secret intelligence documents outside the FBI to unknown recipients. With Feghali's assistance, she forged signatures on top-secret documents related to 9/11 detainees. After all these incidents were confirmed and reported to FBI management, Melek Can Dickerson was allowed to remain in her position, to continue the translation of sensitive intelligence received by the FBI, and to maintain her top-secret clearance. Apparently bureaucratic mid-level FBI management and administrators decided that it would not look good for the Bureau to have this security breach and espionage case investigated and publicized, especially after the Robert Hanssen scandal. The Melek Can Dickerson case was confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee. It received major coverage by the press. According to Director Robert Mueller, the inspector general criticized the FBI for failing to adequately pursue the espionage report on Melek Can Dickerson. I provided your investigators with a detailed and specific account of this issue, the names of other witnesses willing to corroborate this, and additional documents.
Today, more than two years since the Dickerson incident was reported to the FBI, and more than two years since this information was confirmed by the United States Congress and reported by the press, the same people remain in charge of translation quality and security. Dickerson and several FBI targets of investigation hastily left the United States in 2002, and no criminal investigation has been opened. Not only does the supervisor who facilitated this criminal conduct remain in a supervisory position, he has been promoted to supervising Arabic language units of the FBI's counterterrorism and counterintelligence investigations. Your report omits these significant incidents, and your recommendations do not address this serious security breach and likely espionage issue. This issue needs to be investigated and prosecuted. The translation of our intelligence is being entrusted to individuals with loyalties to our enemies. Important "chit-chats" and "chatters" are being intentionally blocked from translation. Why does your report exclude this information and these serious issues despite the evidence and briefings you received? How can budget increases address and resolve this misconduct by mid-level bureaucratic management? How can the addition of an "intelligence czar" solve this problem?
More than four months prior to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, in April 2001, a long-term FBI informant/asset who had been providing the bureau with information since 1990, provided two FBI agents and a translator with specific information regarding a terrorist attack being planned by Osama bin Laden. This asset/informant was previously a high-level intelligence officer in Iran in charge of intelligence from Afghanistan. Through his contacts in Afghanistan, he received information that: 1) Osama bin Laden was planning a major terrorist attack in the United States targeting four or five major cities; 2) the attack was going to involve airplanes; 3) some of the individuals in charge of carrying out this attack were already in place in the United States; 4) the attack was going to be carried out soon, in a few months. The agents who received this information reported it to their superior, Special Agent in Charge of Counterterrorism Thomas Frields at the FBI Washington Field Office, by filing 302 forms, and the translator translated and documented this information. No action was taken by the special agent in charge, and after 9/11 the agents and the translators were told to "keep quiet" regarding this issue. The translator who was present during the session with the FBI informant, Mr. Behrooz Sarshar, reported this incident to Director Mueller in writing, and later to the Department of Justice Inspector General. The press reported this incident, and a report in the Chicago Tribune on July 21, 2004, stated that FBI officials had confirmed that this information was received in April 2001. Furthermore, the Chicago Tribune quoted an aide to Director Mueller saying that Mueller was surprised that the Commission never raised this particular issue with him during the hearing. Mr. Sarshar reported this issue to your investigators on Feb. 12, 2004, and provided them with specific dates, locations, witness names, and contact information for that particular Iranian asset and the two special agents who received the information (please refer to the tape-recorded testimony provided by Mr. Sarshar on February 12, 2004 and given to your investigators). I provided your investigators with a detailed and specific account of this issue, the names of other witnesses, and documents I had seen. Mr. Sarshar also provided the Department of Justice Inspector General with specific information regarding this issue (please refer to DOJ-IG report "Re: Sibel Edmonds and FBI Translation," provided to you prior to the completion of your report).
Almost three years after Sept. 11, many officials still refuse to admit to having specific information regarding the terrorists' plans to attack the United States. The Phoenix Memo, received months prior to the 9/11 attacks, specifically warned FBI HQ of pilot training and its possible link to terrorist activities against the United States. Four months prior to the terrorist attacks, the Iranian asset provided the FBI with specific information regarding the "use of airplanes," "major U.S. cities as targets," and "Osama bin Laden issuing the order." Coleen Rowley likewise reported that specific information had been provided to FBI HQ. All this information went to the same place: FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C., and the FBI Washington Field Office in Washington, D.C. Yet your report claims that not having a central place where all intelligence could be gathered was one of the main factors in our intelligence failure. Why does your report exclude the information regarding the Iranian asset and Behrooz Sarshar from its timeline of missed opportunities? Why was this significant incident not mentioned, despite the public confirmation by the FBI, witnesses provided to your investigators, and briefings you received directly? Why did you surprise even Director Mueller by not asking him questions regarding this significant incident? (Please remember that you ran out of questions to ask during your hearings with Director Mueller and AG John Ashcroft, so please do not cite a "time limit.") How can budget increases remedy the failures of mid-level bureaucrats at FBI Headquarters? How can the addition of an "intelligence czar" fix this problem?
Over two years ago, and after two unclassified sessions with FBI officials, the Senate Judiciary Committee sent letters to Director Mueller, Attorney General Ashcroft, and Inspector General Glenn Fine regarding the existence of unqualified translators in charge of translating high-level sensitive intelligence. The FBI confirmed at least one case: Kevin Taskesen, a Turkish translator, had been given a job as an FBI translator, despite the fact that he had failed all FBI language proficiency tests. In fact, Kevin could not understand or speak even elementary-level English. He had failed English proficiency tests and did not even score sufficiently in the target language. Still, Kevin Taskesen was hired, not due to a lack of other qualified translator candidates, but because his wife worked at FBI HQ as a language proficiency exam administrator. Almost everyone at FBI HQ and the FBI Washington Field Office knew about Kevin. Yet, Kevin was given the task of translating the most sensitive terrorist-related information, and he was sent to Guantanamo Bay to translate the interrogation of and information for all Turkic language detainees (Turks, Uzbeks, Turkmens, etc.). The FBI was supposed to be trying to obtain information regarding possible future attack plans from these detainees, yet the FBI knowingly sent unqualified translators to gather and translate this information. Furthermore, these detainees were either released, detained or prosecuted based on translations by unqualified translators knowingly sent there by the FBI. Sen. Grassley and Sen. Leahy publicly confirmed Kevin Taskesen's case (please refer to Senate letters and documents provided to your investigators in January-February 2004). The program 60 Minutes showed Kevin's picture and listed him as one of the unqualified translators sent to Guantanamo Bay, as confirmed by the FBI. The Department of Justice Inspector General provided a detailed account of these problems. I provided your investigators with a specific account of this issue and the names of other witnesses willing to corroborate this.
After over two years since Kevin Taskesen's case was publicly confirmed, and after almost two years since 60 Minutes broadcast Taskesen's case, Kevin Taskesen remains in his position as sole Turkish and Turkic language translator for the FBI Washington Field Office. After admitting that Kevin Taskesen was not qualified to translate sensitive intelligence and investigation of terrorist activities, the FBI still keeps him in charge of translating highly sensitive documents and leads. Those individuals in the FBI hiring department who facilitated the hiring of unqualified translators due to nepotism/cronyism remain in their positions. Yet your report does not mention this case or the chronic problems within the FBI translation, hiring and screening departments. Accountability for those responsible for these practices that endanger our national security is not brought up even once in your report. Why does your report exclude these serious issues despite the evidence and briefings you received?
In October 2001, approximately one month after the Sept. 11 attack, an agent returned a certain document to the FBI Washington Field Office to have it re-translated. This special agent rightfully believed that, considering the suspect under surveillance and the issues involved, the original translation might have missed information that could prove valuable in the investigation of terrorist activities. After this document was received by the FBI Washington Field Office and re-translated verbatim, the field agent's hunch appeared to be correct. The new translation revealed certain information regarding blueprints, pictures and building material for skyscrapers being sent overseas. It also revealed illegal activities in obtaining visas from certain embassies in the Middle East through network contacts and bribery. However, after the re-translation was completed and the new significant information revealed, the unit supervisor in charge of certain Middle Eastern languages, Mike Feghali, decided NOT to send the re-translated information to the special agent who had requested it. Instead, Feghali sent the agent a note stating that the translation was reviewed and that the original translation was accurate. Feghali argued that sending the accurate translation would hurt the original translator and would cause problems for the FBI language department. The special agent never received an accurate translation of that document. I provided your investigators with a detailed and specific account of this issue, the name and date of this particular investigation, and the names of other witnesses willing to corroborate this. This information was also provided to the Department of Justice Inspector General.
Only one month after the catastrophic events of Sept. 11, while many agents were working around the clock to obtain leads and information, the bureaucratic administrators in the FBI's largest and most important translation unit were covering up their past failures, blocking important leads and information, and jeopardizing ongoing terrorist investigations. The supervisor involved in this incident, Mike Feghali, was in charge of important Middle Eastern languages within the FBI Washington Field Office, and had a record of previous misconduct. After this supervisor's prior misconduct was reported to the FBI's higher-level management, the Inspector General's Office, the United States Congress, and the 9/11 Commission, he was promoted to supervisor of the FBI's Arabic language unit. Today, Mike Feghali remains in the FBI Washington Field Office and is in charge of a language unit receiving the chit-chat that our color-coded threat system is based upon. Yet your report contains zero information regarding these systemic problems that led us to our failure in preventing the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In your report, there are no references to individuals responsible for hindering past and current investigations, or those who are willing to compromise our security and our lives for their career advancement and security. Why does your report exclude this information despite all the evidence and briefings you received?
The latest buzz topic regarding intelligence is the problem of sharing information within and between intelligence agencies. The public has still not been told of the intentional obstruction of intelligence. The public has not been told that certain information, despite its relevance to terrorist activities, is not shared with counterterrorism units. This was true prior to 9/11, and it remains true today. If counterintelligence receives information about terrorism that implicates certain nations, semi-legit organizations or the politically powerful in this country, then that information is not shared with counterterrorism, regardless of the consequences. In certain cases, frustrated FBI agents have cited "direct pressure by the State Department." The Department of Justice Inspector General received detailed evidence regarding this issue. I provided your investigators with an account of this issue, the names of other witnesses willing to corroborate this, and the names of U.S. officials involved in these transactions and activities.
After almost three years, the American people still do not know that thousands of lives are jeopardized under apolicy of "protecting certain foreign business relations." The victims' family members still do not realize that answers they have sought relentlessly for over two years have been blocked in the interest of "safeguarding certain diplomatic relations." Your hearings and your report did not even attempt to address these unspoken, unwritten practices, although, unlike me, you were not placed under any gag. Despite your full awareness of criminal conduct by high-level government employees, you have not proposed criminal investigations, even though you are required to do so. How can budget increases resolve these problems when some of them are caused by unspoken practices and unwritten policies? How can an "intelligence czar" override these policies and practices?
Flashback: Dead Saudi Major Related To 9-11 Terrorists?
by Tom Flocco
PHILADELPHIA -- August 14, 2002 (TomFlocco.com) -- A Saudi Military Flight Instructor Who Died Mysteriously On May 8 Had The Same Name as Two 9/11 Terrorists Who Lived At The Same U.S. Naval Air Base. Two other test pilots also dying with Saudi Air Force Major Ambarak S. Alghamdi were employed by Raytheon Corporation, which possesses technology capable of disrupting flight controls and taking down aircraft with a secret pulse-ray technology.
This, as reports revealed that President Bush's brother, Governor Jeb Bush, was on board the C-130 military aircraft that flew out of Sarasota airport the day after the attacks, carrying FBI agents who had collected criminal evidence--all the flight instruction evaluations, after-action reports, personality profiles, and financial records of all Arab terrorist flight students at Huffman Aviation School in Venice, Florida.
Amid reports in the days after the September 11 attacks that two of the hijackers, Saeed Alghamdi and Ahmed Alghamdi received flight training at Florida’s Pensacola Naval Air Station, a new dot has been connected which may shed more light on past revelations that 9/11 terrorists learned to fly at secure United States military bases.
Royal Saudi Air Force Major Ambarak S. Alghamdi had continued to remain in his position as a Pensacola Naval Air Station flight instructor after the 9/11 attacks, notwithstanding his Saudi Government ties - and that most of the terrorists were Saudis. [This incredible information came out just four days after the attacks, but no member of congress or the 9-11 Commission called for a public inquiry into this relationship.]
No reports are forthcoming, however, about whether Government investigators or victim family attorneys have yet sought information and biographical reports or files from the State Department or Saudi Arabian government as to whether the Saudi flight instructor was related to three FBI-named United and American Airlines hijackers who had the same Alghamdi surname.
Strangely, however, Saudi Major Ambarak Alghamdi is now dead - victim of a mysterious, unexplained, and largely uncommented-upon plane crash on May 8 in clear weather. Two other victims of the accident were from the Raytheon Corporation, which now owns technology via its E-Systems division that is capable of, “disrupting or taking down airplanes....with advanced guiding systems,” according to patented technology invented by Texas physicist Bernard J. Eastlund.
An FBI press release (9-27-2001) listed the third Alghamdi - Hamza - as yet another hijacker who was on the same United Airlines 175 jet as Ahmed Alghamdi, both of whom crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center with doomed Americans.
The specialized Raytheon technology is so secret, that according to reports, even the House and Senate are not being told how appropriations in the billions are being spent on its so-called ‘black’ projects - primarily developed for its main employer, the CIA.
According to a Pensacola News-Journal report, Florida Senator Bob Graham, Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee investigating the September 11 attacks, was briefed on September 16 regarding the latest intelligence information, but there was no mention of suspected hijackers having been enrolled as pilot trainees in Pensacola, said his spokesman, Paul Anderson. (9-17-2001) Graham has remained silent on the subject.
Graham has already been linked to a controversial September 11 breakfast meeting with Pakistan’s Inter-Services Security Agency (ISI) Chief who ordered $100,000 wired from Pakistan to terrorist leader Mohammed Atta in the days immediately prior to the attacks.
According to Pentagon and local military officials, “[foreign] students are instructed in everything from warfare specialty training to air navigation meteorology and land/water survival," while refusing comment on the media reports of September 16.
Pentagon officials referred calls on the subject to the FBI, which also refused comment, said the News-Journal.
This, at a time when Congress is soon to vote on the fall Appropriations bills which will essentially reward widely acknowledged national security failures at the Department of Defense (DOD), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) with billions of dollars in taxpayer resources -- without one public 9/11 hearing seeking either truth or accountability.
LIVING IN AMERICA
Domicile Of Two 911 Hijackers & Three Pilots Named Alghamdi
Military records show that hijackers Saeed and Ahmed Alghamdi listed their address on driver licenses and car registrations as 10 Radford Blvd., a base roadway where residences for foreign-military flight trainees are located, according to Newsweek (9-15-2001). Saeed Alghamdi listed the Radford address to register a 1998 Oldsmobile, and then used it again to register a late model Buick. Driver licenses thought to have been issued to [Ahmed Alghamdi] in 1996 and 1998 also list the Radford residence, added Newsweek.
Newsweek then visited the Pensacola base, “where military police confirmed the address housed foreign military flight trainees, but denied access past front barricades. Officials at the base confirmed that the FBI is investigating the three students.”
On September 17, Florida Senator Bill Nelson, “asked the Pentagon to confirm or refute reports that two of the terrorists were listed at a housing facility for foreign military officers at a Pensacola Florida Air Base,” according to the Washington Post (9-22-2001).
The direct links connecting the two hijackers to United Airlines could lead victim family lawyers to seek additional documents and files detailing Pentagon and INS procedures, interviews and reports about the two Alghamdis - one on United 175 and one on United 93 - given that the documents would also not likely present national security violations.
On September 21, the Washington Post added that Senator Nelson, “was informed that the FBI could neither say ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ ” because the bureau was still, “investigating any connection to the military facility,” according to Nelson’s press spokesman, Dan McLaughlin.
However, investigative journalist Daniel Hopsicker also called Nelson’s office, adding that the Florida Senator had still not received a reply as of October 30, 2001: “In the wake of those reports we asked about the Pensacola Naval Air Station but we never got a definitive answer from the [Ashcroft] Justice Department,” said a spokesman for Senator Nelson. (Online Journal, 10-30-2001)
Hopsicker, leading the way regarding 9/11-linked reporting from Florida, added that Nelson‘s spokeman said, “So we asked the FBI for an answer ‘if and when’ they could provide us one. Their response to date has been that they are trying to sort through something complicated and difficult.”
A tomflocco.com call yesterday to Senator Nelson’s office seeking an update on the matter revealed that Nelson finally received a DOJ letter from Attorney General John Ashcroft, who asserted that Pensacola Naval Air Station did not train hijackers, according to Nelson’s press spokesperson Gretchen Hitchner.
However, Ashcroft offered no explanation as to how Saudi terrorists could have gained access to and been able to live at the Pensacola, Florida military base as their driver licenses and car registrations indicated, according to news reports - flight training or not.
And Ashcroft’s letter to Nelson never mentioned that the two terrorists had Pensacola Air Station addresses - let alone that a now-mysteriously deceased, Pensacola naval flight instructor from the Royal Saudi Air Force had the same name and also lived and worked at the U.S. naval air base.
PHILADELPHIA -- August 14, 2002 (TomFlocco.com) -- A Saudi Military Flight Instructor Who Died Mysteriously On May 8 Had The Same Name as Two 9/11 Terrorists Who Lived At The Same U.S. Naval Air Base. Two other test pilots also dying with Saudi Air Force Major Ambarak S. Alghamdi were employed by Raytheon Corporation, which possesses technology capable of disrupting flight controls and taking down aircraft with a secret pulse-ray technology.
This, as reports revealed that President Bush's brother, Governor Jeb Bush, was on board the C-130 military aircraft that flew out of Sarasota airport the day after the attacks, carrying FBI agents who had collected criminal evidence--all the flight instruction evaluations, after-action reports, personality profiles, and financial records of all Arab terrorist flight students at Huffman Aviation School in Venice, Florida.
Amid reports in the days after the September 11 attacks that two of the hijackers, Saeed Alghamdi and Ahmed Alghamdi received flight training at Florida’s Pensacola Naval Air Station, a new dot has been connected which may shed more light on past revelations that 9/11 terrorists learned to fly at secure United States military bases.
Royal Saudi Air Force Major Ambarak S. Alghamdi had continued to remain in his position as a Pensacola Naval Air Station flight instructor after the 9/11 attacks, notwithstanding his Saudi Government ties - and that most of the terrorists were Saudis. [This incredible information came out just four days after the attacks, but no member of congress or the 9-11 Commission called for a public inquiry into this relationship.]
No reports are forthcoming, however, about whether Government investigators or victim family attorneys have yet sought information and biographical reports or files from the State Department or Saudi Arabian government as to whether the Saudi flight instructor was related to three FBI-named United and American Airlines hijackers who had the same Alghamdi surname.
Strangely, however, Saudi Major Ambarak Alghamdi is now dead - victim of a mysterious, unexplained, and largely uncommented-upon plane crash on May 8 in clear weather. Two other victims of the accident were from the Raytheon Corporation, which now owns technology via its E-Systems division that is capable of, “disrupting or taking down airplanes....with advanced guiding systems,” according to patented technology invented by Texas physicist Bernard J. Eastlund.
An FBI press release (9-27-2001) listed the third Alghamdi - Hamza - as yet another hijacker who was on the same United Airlines 175 jet as Ahmed Alghamdi, both of whom crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center with doomed Americans.
The specialized Raytheon technology is so secret, that according to reports, even the House and Senate are not being told how appropriations in the billions are being spent on its so-called ‘black’ projects - primarily developed for its main employer, the CIA.
According to a Pensacola News-Journal report, Florida Senator Bob Graham, Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee investigating the September 11 attacks, was briefed on September 16 regarding the latest intelligence information, but there was no mention of suspected hijackers having been enrolled as pilot trainees in Pensacola, said his spokesman, Paul Anderson. (9-17-2001) Graham has remained silent on the subject.
Graham has already been linked to a controversial September 11 breakfast meeting with Pakistan’s Inter-Services Security Agency (ISI) Chief who ordered $100,000 wired from Pakistan to terrorist leader Mohammed Atta in the days immediately prior to the attacks.
According to Pentagon and local military officials, “[foreign] students are instructed in everything from warfare specialty training to air navigation meteorology and land/water survival," while refusing comment on the media reports of September 16.
Pentagon officials referred calls on the subject to the FBI, which also refused comment, said the News-Journal.
This, at a time when Congress is soon to vote on the fall Appropriations bills which will essentially reward widely acknowledged national security failures at the Department of Defense (DOD), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) with billions of dollars in taxpayer resources -- without one public 9/11 hearing seeking either truth or accountability.
LIVING IN AMERICA
Domicile Of Two 911 Hijackers & Three Pilots Named Alghamdi
Military records show that hijackers Saeed and Ahmed Alghamdi listed their address on driver licenses and car registrations as 10 Radford Blvd., a base roadway where residences for foreign-military flight trainees are located, according to Newsweek (9-15-2001). Saeed Alghamdi listed the Radford address to register a 1998 Oldsmobile, and then used it again to register a late model Buick. Driver licenses thought to have been issued to [Ahmed Alghamdi] in 1996 and 1998 also list the Radford residence, added Newsweek.
Newsweek then visited the Pensacola base, “where military police confirmed the address housed foreign military flight trainees, but denied access past front barricades. Officials at the base confirmed that the FBI is investigating the three students.”
On September 17, Florida Senator Bill Nelson, “asked the Pentagon to confirm or refute reports that two of the terrorists were listed at a housing facility for foreign military officers at a Pensacola Florida Air Base,” according to the Washington Post (9-22-2001).
The direct links connecting the two hijackers to United Airlines could lead victim family lawyers to seek additional documents and files detailing Pentagon and INS procedures, interviews and reports about the two Alghamdis - one on United 175 and one on United 93 - given that the documents would also not likely present national security violations.
On September 21, the Washington Post added that Senator Nelson, “was informed that the FBI could neither say ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ ” because the bureau was still, “investigating any connection to the military facility,” according to Nelson’s press spokesman, Dan McLaughlin.
However, investigative journalist Daniel Hopsicker also called Nelson’s office, adding that the Florida Senator had still not received a reply as of October 30, 2001: “In the wake of those reports we asked about the Pensacola Naval Air Station but we never got a definitive answer from the [Ashcroft] Justice Department,” said a spokesman for Senator Nelson. (Online Journal, 10-30-2001)
Hopsicker, leading the way regarding 9/11-linked reporting from Florida, added that Nelson‘s spokeman said, “So we asked the FBI for an answer ‘if and when’ they could provide us one. Their response to date has been that they are trying to sort through something complicated and difficult.”
A tomflocco.com call yesterday to Senator Nelson’s office seeking an update on the matter revealed that Nelson finally received a DOJ letter from Attorney General John Ashcroft, who asserted that Pensacola Naval Air Station did not train hijackers, according to Nelson’s press spokesperson Gretchen Hitchner.
However, Ashcroft offered no explanation as to how Saudi terrorists could have gained access to and been able to live at the Pensacola, Florida military base as their driver licenses and car registrations indicated, according to news reports - flight training or not.
And Ashcroft’s letter to Nelson never mentioned that the two terrorists had Pensacola Air Station addresses - let alone that a now-mysteriously deceased, Pensacola naval flight instructor from the Royal Saudi Air Force had the same name and also lived and worked at the U.S. naval air base.
Wednesday, 26 May 2010
Afghans believe US is funding Taliban
My comment on this piece.
Great piece Daniella. Unlike most of the ivory tower stuff printed in The Guardian by paid up wonks and experts, this rings true and Daniella has done the footwork. We get reams of stuff from the corporate consensus about fighting terrorism when the real story since 911 and before is America's need for enemies in order to justify its ever expanding military machine and its expanding archipelago of bases and client regimes around the world. It's about power, energy, defence budgets and the military industrial complex. The US was built on a frontier colonial mindset that always sees enemies. Indeed, it has had enemies over the years but it was President Eisenhower who pointed out the dangers of the military industrial complex, and the founding fathers who warned against the dangers of a standing army. The Afghans are not wrong.
Since 2000 US military spending has increased 9% a year! According to some measures, US military spending today, at approximately $1 trillion per annum, is higher in real terms than it was during World War 2. This in an era when America no longer has any significant military enemies.
Islamism, like Saddam Hussein, is a US client force, created first to bring down the Soviet Union, then used as proxies in the central Asian cold war between the West, Russia and China. (Saddam was used against Iran and then got out of hand, just like the Islamists). Pakistan created the Taliban, Pakistan receives billions in aid from the US, and the US pays off various Afghan warlords who in turn pay off the Taliban.
The whole war on terror in its us-and-them simplicity is a phantom created by the Neocons to justify their plans for world domination. If people want to deny the existence of PNAC that's fine. And of course none of the following happened:
Head of Pakistani intelligence met all senior US political and military leaders in a visit to US just prior to and during 911. He went away with a new US alliance with Pakistan.
French and Indian news reports show ISI colonel paid Mohammed Atta $100,000 in to his bank account days before 911.
3 out of the 4 terrorist pilots trained at Venice air base in Florida, the CIA's favourite base for drug running and black ops going back to the 1950s.
Instead of declaring war on Pakistan after 911, America embraced it and turned on Afghanistan and Iraq. Osama Bin Laden is not even on the wanted list for 911 because, as the FBI has stated, there is no evidence linking him to the attacks.
America accounts for half of the world's military spending. At least a third of US taxpayer dollars goes on the military. I would not pay those taxes. When will Americans wake up to the fact that they are a juggernaut heading for a cliff and that they are being duped into a permanent war, as Dick Cheney stated clearly after 911? It will bankrupt them.
Great piece Daniella. Unlike most of the ivory tower stuff printed in The Guardian by paid up wonks and experts, this rings true and Daniella has done the footwork. We get reams of stuff from the corporate consensus about fighting terrorism when the real story since 911 and before is America's need for enemies in order to justify its ever expanding military machine and its expanding archipelago of bases and client regimes around the world. It's about power, energy, defence budgets and the military industrial complex. The US was built on a frontier colonial mindset that always sees enemies. Indeed, it has had enemies over the years but it was President Eisenhower who pointed out the dangers of the military industrial complex, and the founding fathers who warned against the dangers of a standing army. The Afghans are not wrong.
Since 2000 US military spending has increased 9% a year! According to some measures, US military spending today, at approximately $1 trillion per annum, is higher in real terms than it was during World War 2. This in an era when America no longer has any significant military enemies.
Islamism, like Saddam Hussein, is a US client force, created first to bring down the Soviet Union, then used as proxies in the central Asian cold war between the West, Russia and China. (Saddam was used against Iran and then got out of hand, just like the Islamists). Pakistan created the Taliban, Pakistan receives billions in aid from the US, and the US pays off various Afghan warlords who in turn pay off the Taliban.
The whole war on terror in its us-and-them simplicity is a phantom created by the Neocons to justify their plans for world domination. If people want to deny the existence of PNAC that's fine. And of course none of the following happened:
Head of Pakistani intelligence met all senior US political and military leaders in a visit to US just prior to and during 911. He went away with a new US alliance with Pakistan.
French and Indian news reports show ISI colonel paid Mohammed Atta $100,000 in to his bank account days before 911.
3 out of the 4 terrorist pilots trained at Venice air base in Florida, the CIA's favourite base for drug running and black ops going back to the 1950s.
Instead of declaring war on Pakistan after 911, America embraced it and turned on Afghanistan and Iraq. Osama Bin Laden is not even on the wanted list for 911 because, as the FBI has stated, there is no evidence linking him to the attacks.
America accounts for half of the world's military spending. At least a third of US taxpayer dollars goes on the military. I would not pay those taxes. When will Americans wake up to the fact that they are a juggernaut heading for a cliff and that they are being duped into a permanent war, as Dick Cheney stated clearly after 911? It will bankrupt them.
How the US funds the Taliban
From The Nation:
On October 29, 2001, while the Taliban's rule over Afghanistan was under assault, the regime's ambassador in Islamabad gave a chaotic press conference in front of several dozen reporters sitting on the grass. On the Taliban diplomat's right sat his interpreter, Ahmad Rateb Popal, a man with an imposing presence. Like the ambassador, Popal wore a black turban, and he had a huge bushy beard. He had a black patch over his right eye socket, a prosthetic left arm and a deformed right hand, the result of injuries from an explosives mishap during an old operation against the Soviets in Kabul.
Read more
On October 29, 2001, while the Taliban's rule over Afghanistan was under assault, the regime's ambassador in Islamabad gave a chaotic press conference in front of several dozen reporters sitting on the grass. On the Taliban diplomat's right sat his interpreter, Ahmad Rateb Popal, a man with an imposing presence. Like the ambassador, Popal wore a black turban, and he had a huge bushy beard. He had a black patch over his right eye socket, a prosthetic left arm and a deformed right hand, the result of injuries from an explosives mishap during an old operation against the Soviets in Kabul.
Read more
Monday, 24 May 2010
Your Tax Dollars at War: More than 53% of Your Tax Payment Goes to the Military
Your Tax Dollars at War: More than 53% of Your Tax Payment Goes to the Military
From http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/dave_lindorff/27987/your_tax_dollars_at_war_more_than_53_of_your_tax_payment_goes_to_the_military
From http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/dave_lindorff/27987/your_tax_dollars_at_war_more_than_53_of_your_tax_payment_goes_to_the_military
Britain's spending on war
This table shows that after pensions, healthcare, education and welfare, UK military spending is the fourth biggest consumer of tax income, at £43 billion ($62 billion). By comparison education spending is £80 billion and transport only £13 billion. Britain's GDP is £1.4 trillion and its overall government spending £633 billion. As a % of total government spending defence is 6.7%. Compared to US military spending - at $1 trillion or 30% of spending, Britain's is low. But it is still around £1000 per adult in the country. I am not at all happy that that much of my tax money is going on the military.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
