Home | Community | Message Board


World Seed Supply
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleXochitl
synchronicitycircuit
Registered: 07/15/03
Posts: 1,241
Loc: the brainforest
Bush administration to silence evidence
    #2607323 - 04/27/04 06:28 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

from the conservative UK newspaper the Independent: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=515270

Quote:

Lawyers try to gag FBI worker over 9/11
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington

26 April 2004

The Bush administration will today seek to prevent a former FBI translator from providing evidence about 11 September intelligence failures to a group of relatives and survivors who have accused international banks and officials of aiding al-Qa'ida.

Sibel Edmonds was subpoenaed by a law firm representing more than 500 family members and survivors of the attacks to testify that she had seen information proving there was considerable evidence before September 2001 that al-Qa'ida was planning to strike the US with aircraft. The lawyers made their demand after reading comments Mrs Edmonds had made to The Independent.

But the US Justice Department is seeking to stop her from testifying, citing the rarely used "state secrets privilege". Today in a federal court in Washington, senior government lawyers will try to gag Mrs Edmonds, claiming that disclosure of her evidence "would cause serious damage to the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States".

Mrs Edmonds, 33, a Turkish-American who had top secret security clearance, claimed this month that while working in the FBI's Washington headquarters, she saw information proving senior officials knew of al-Qa'ida plans to attack the US with aircraft months before the strikes. She has provided sworn testimony to the independent panel appointed by President George Bush to investigate the circumstances surrounding 11 September.

Mrs Edmonds was subpoenaed by the law firm Motley-Rice, which represents hundreds of families who are taking civil action against a number of banks and two members of the Saudi royal family for allegedly aiding al-Qa'ida.

Her lawyer, Mark Zaid, said last night: "The FBI wants to shut her up completely." He said it was ridiculous to claim that everything Mrs Edmonds knew had national security implications. Rather, he said, the FBI wanted to silence his client to save its embarrassment.

The Bush administration has been put on the back foot by allegations that senior officials - perhaps even Mr Bush himself - were provided with considerable information warning of an imminent attack by al-Qa'ida and that they failed to act. Mrs Edmonds said yesterday: "What are they are afraid of? If I am not allowed to give evidence, the families will not get the information I have; that will be that."

She said it was wrong for the Bush administration to claim it wanted a full investigation. "If there is transparency, there is going to be accountability and that is what they don't want."




If Edmonds is correct, then this is certainly "actionable knowledge" that is being covered up by the Bush administration and the FBI.


--------------------
As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know.

-Donald Rumsfeld 2/2/02 Pentagon


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleafoaf
CEO DBK?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: Xochitl]
    #2607998 - 04/27/04 08:44 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

hrmmm....funny how you don't hear shit about this from
domestic news agencies.

will dig around a bit...


--------------------
All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibledaussaulit
Forgetful

Registered: 08/06/02
Posts: 2,894
Loc: Earth
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: afoaf]
    #2608029 - 04/27/04 08:50 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Maybe because the domestic news is generally conservative and won't post something like that.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleTrueBrode
Stranger

Registered: 11/03/03
Posts: 287
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: Xochitl]
    #2608174 - 04/27/04 09:18 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

That's not evidence that the Bush Administration knew anything, rather the FBI, which is about to take the fall for 911 anyway.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 33,778
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: daussaulit]
    #2608177 - 04/27/04 09:19 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Maybe because the domestic news is generally conservative



:lol:


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 33,778
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: daussaulit]
    #2608193 - 04/27/04 09:24 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

daussaulit said:
Maybe because the domestic news is generally conservative and won't post something like that.



Seems you're in the minority.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibledaussaulit
Forgetful

Registered: 08/06/02
Posts: 2,894
Loc: Earth
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2608494 - 04/27/04 10:26 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

It seems too liberal because everyone is too conservative.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXochitl
synchronicitycircuit
Registered: 07/15/03
Posts: 1,241
Loc: the brainforest
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: TrueBrode]
    #2609029 - 04/27/04 11:55 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

That's not evidence that the Bush Administration knew anything, rather the FBI, which is about to take the fall for 911 anyway.




I am curious why the Bush administration is so concerned with keeping her silent. Any thoughts?


--------------------
As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know.

-Donald Rumsfeld 2/2/02 Pentagon


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 1 year, 10 months
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: Xochitl]
    #2610428 - 04/28/04 05:07 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Xochitl writes:

I am curious why the Bush administration is so concerned with keeping her silent. Any thoughts?

The issue at stake here is not with "keeping her silent", its a matter of who she tells. Note that she has already testified before members of the US government who are covered (as she is) by the Official Secrets Act --

"She has provided sworn testimony to the independent panel appointed by President George Bush to investigate the circumstances surrounding 11 September."

That is an entirely different thing than testifying in open court for a class action lawsuit brought against civilian bank officials --

"The Bush administration will today seek to prevent a former FBI translator from providing evidence about 11 September intelligence failures to a group of relatives and survivors who have accused international banks and officials of aiding al-Qa'ida. Sibel Edmonds was subpoenaed by a law firm representing more than 500 family members and survivors of the attacks...."

Like it or not, in any society there really are some matters which cannot be discussed openly. Offhand, I can think of no country which doesn't have some form of Official Secrets Act.

pinky


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,733
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 4 months, 2 days
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: Phred]
    #2610445 - 04/28/04 05:34 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Surely the Americans have a right to know whether she is telling the truth or not? I hardly see how it could be detrimental to national security. I can see how it would be detrimental to alot of people in the FBI and the government though...perhaps thats why she isnt allowed to testify.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 1 year, 10 months
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: GazzBut]
    #2610464 - 04/28/04 06:01 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

GazzBut writes:

Surely the Americans have a right to know whether she is telling the truth or not? I hardly see how it could be detrimental to national security.

Yes, they have a right to know. That is why she testified before the 9/11 Commission, in closed session, to people with security clearance who are bound by the Official Secrets Act.

But testifying in open court is completely different. It's not just the American people who would have access to her testimony then, but the entire world. Once sworn, she would have to answer truthfully every question put to her or risk being slapped with a contempt of court charge. She would be caught between a rock and a hard place -- aqnswer everything and be prosecuted for violating the Official Secrets Act, or clam up on certain questions and be jailed for contempt of court. It's a no-win situation for her.

As a translator, she had access to certain information that cannot be revealed to the world at large without compromising intelligence gathering operations. It's no big conspiracy, it's just the way things work.

pinky


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,733
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 4 months, 2 days
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: Phred]
    #2610489 - 04/28/04 06:37 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

So what do you make of her claim that the FBI and therefore the government knew about Al-qaida's plans to use aircraft to attack the US months in advance? lemme guess she is a)crazy or b) a liar  :grin:


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleTrueBrode
Stranger

Registered: 11/03/03
Posts: 287
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: Xochitl]
    #2610921 - 04/28/04 12:11 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

I am curious why the Bush administration is so concerned with keeping her silent. Any thoughts?

Who the hell knows? This administration is unnecessarily secretive about nearly everything that is of public interest. According to her own claims though, it appears that her knowledge would only serve to further demonize the FBI, not the Bush Administration. In my own- far out- opinion I think 911 was a conspiracy, and until there's an independent investigation tying up loose ends, my opionion won't change. Therefore I assume the Bush administration does not want to let out any information that could possibly taint the image of federal government any further.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,733
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 4 months, 2 days
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: TrueBrode]
    #2614993 - 04/29/04 06:00 AM (12 years, 7 months ago)

I think, if her claims were correct, that it could very easily indicate severe incompetence, or worse, on the part of the Bush govt. Im not fully aware of what her claims are, is she saying the FBI never even passed this info on to the govt?


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleTrueBrode
Stranger

Registered: 11/03/03
Posts: 287
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: GazzBut]
    #2616095 - 04/29/04 02:15 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Ok, according to this article it looks pretty bad, as Ashcroft is painted in an even worse light affecting the Bush Administration. And then this:

"We also asked Edmonds if she thought spies in the FBI and State Department contacted al Qaeda operatives--confirmed to be living in the United States--about ongoing plans for President Bush?s new government policy directive [signed on September 4, 2001] which would authorize tightened American security. This, but also whether espionage within the Bush administration may have played a part in accelerating the attacks which occurred just seven days later."

http://tomflocco.com/modules.php?name=Ne...r=0&thold=0


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinegrib
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/01/03
Posts: 550
Loc: Here and there
Last seen: 2 years, 5 months
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: Phred]
    #2616161 - 04/29/04 02:36 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

As a translator, she had access to certain information that cannot be revealed to the world at large without compromising intelligence gathering operations. It's no big conspiracy, it's just the way things work.




Possibly or, since it's all speculation anyway, you could say, 'As a translator, she had access to certain information that cannot be revealed to the world at large without making the U.S. government look incompetent and possibly revealing foreign policy failings...'


--------------------
<~>Our truest life is when we are in dreams awake <~>


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 1 year, 10 months
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: grib]
    #2616539 - 04/29/04 03:47 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

grib writes:

Possibly or, since it's all speculation anyway, you could say, 'As a translator, she had access to certain information that cannot be revealed to the world at large without making the U.S. government look incompetent and possibly revealing foreign policy failings...'

Not necessarily so. As a translator she certainly had access to information covered by the Official Secrets Act -- that's not speculation. She was translating from Arabic, after all, and her claim is that whatever it was she translated indicated that an attack on the US using aircraft as weapons was being planned. That kind of chatter by foreign combatants is not obtained by reading newspapers but by intercepting communications between conspirators. The name of the agent or agency who provided that chatter for translation is classified information, as is the method by which the chatter was obtained.

But yes, we can speculate that she may also have had access to information showing the results of US foreign policy -- good and bad. What's your point?

pinky


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLearyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 29,766
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 6 hours, 6 minutes
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: Phred]
    #2617444 - 04/29/04 06:27 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)



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


Mp3 of the month: BLC - I Don't Wanna Go



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 33,778
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: Learyfan]
    #2617471 - 04/29/04 06:31 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Just out of curiosity.... since it appears you don't like Bush and Cheney testifying at the same time (neither do I).... how would you feel if Clinton, White House counsel Bruce Lindsey and his National Security Advisor Sandy Berger did the same?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Bush administration to silence evidence [Re: Phred]
    #2617584 - 04/29/04 06:51 PM (12 years, 7 months ago)

Like it or not, in any society there really are some matters which cannot be discussed openly. Offhand, I can think of no country which doesn't have some form of Official Secrets Act.

This doesn't necessarily mean that something cannot be discussed openly just because a person is bound by such an act. Just as a jury can refuse to convict a person of breaking an unjust law, a whilstleblower can go public with secret information if they feel it is in the public's best interests for them to know. Obviously the whistleblower has to be prepared to face the consequences, as did Katharine Gun:

Quote:


GCHQ translator cleared over leak
A GCHQ translator sacked for revealing a secret e-mail has been cleared of a charge under the Official Secrets Act.

Katharine Gun, 29, from Cheltenham, claimed the e-mail was from US spies asking British officers to tap phones of nations voting on war against Iraq.

She walked free on Wednesday when the prosecution offered no evidence.

Ms Gun had always said she had acted in an effort to prevent the war, and outside court said: "I have no regrets and I would do it again."

The leaking of the e-mail to the Observer newspaper generated a row and saw Ms Gun's case become a cause celebre in the US, with civil rights activist Jesse Jackson and actor Sean Penn lending their support.

Human rights group Liberty, which supported Ms Gun throughout her trial, said it was possible the prosecution's decision followed political intervention.

There has been speculation the government was worried about the disclosure of secret documents during the trial, particularly the advice by Attorney General Lord Goldsmith about the legality of war.

Under the Official Secrets Act, the attorney general has the final decision on whether or not to prosecute.

This needed to get out, the public deserved to know what was going on at the time

But the attorney general's office told the BBC the decision to drop the charge had nothing to do with Lord Goldsmith's advice.

Ms Gun's legal team served documents on the government on Tuesday demanding to see any advice given to ministers about the legality of the war.

But BBC political correspondent Guto Harri said a government spokesperson insisted the decision to drop the case was taken before the demand for documents was made.

The same spokesperson suggested the case might have been dropped as Ms Gun planned to argue she leaked the e-mail to save lives from being lost in a war, something that could persuade a jury and would lead to the reputation of the Official Secrets Act being damaged.

Our correspondent said this suggested the government had made a political calculation that a random selection of a dozen jurors would be likely to be so instinctively anti-war than an acquittal would be likely.

'Baffled'

Ms Gun, who was sacked from GCHQ in June and charged on 13 November, thanked her family and friends for helping her through the case.

She told a news conference: "Obviously I'm not prone to leak secrets left, right and centre... but this needed to get out, the public deserved to know what was going on at the time.

"I was pretty horrified and I felt that the British intelligence services were being asked to do something that would undermine the whole UN democratic processes."

Ms Gun revealed she was strongly anti-war but said she had not been looking for a piece of information to leak and embarrass the government.

"I'm just baffled in the 21st century we as human beings are still dropping bombs on each other as a means to resolve issues."

The memo, from January last year, reportedly said the National Security Agency had begun a "surge" in eavesdropping on UN Security Council countries crucial to the vote on a second resolution for action in Iraq.

Officials from Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Bulgaria, Guinea and Pakistan all had their phones tapped in what the Observer described as a "dirty tricks" operation.

'Political charges'

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner said managers within the intelligence service might now be thinking about talking to members of staff about their concerns to prevent future whistle-blowing.

Shami Chakrabarti, of Liberty, said the decision to charge Mrs Gun in the first place had been political.

"One wonders whether disclosure in this criminal trial might have been a little too embarrassing," she said.

The Liberal Democrats' foreign affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell said: "It is possible the attorney general's legal advice might have been published at last. This is a government retreat.''

Ms Gun pleaded not guilty on Wednesday, after which the prosecution announced it would not be going ahead with its case.

Mark Ellison, for the prosecution, said: "There is no longer sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction.

"It would not be appropriate to go into the reasons for this decision."

No explanation

The judge, the Recorder of London Michael Hyam, recorded a formal verdict of not guilty.

The defence inquired why it took until Wednesday for the case to be dropped, but the prosecution offered no explanation.

They also want to know why news of the charges being dropped was apparently leaked to the Guardian newspaper last week.

All that is needed for a successful prosecution under the Official Secrets Act is for the prosecution to demonstrate the accused is covered by it, which Ms Gun was, and they have revealed information covered by it, which she also admitted.

Her solicitor James Welch described the prosecution's excuse as "rather lame".

Former spy David Shayler, jailed for revealing secrets, said a blanket of secrecy was used to protect intelligence matters that did not affect national security.

"If the intelligence services are going to do things that are illegal they have to expect people to whistle-blow."




--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Bush Administration Wants Moussaoui Case Halted 1stimer 512 19 07/16/03 06:04 PM
by houshroom
* The Bush administration's top forty lies.
( 1 2 all )
bukkake 1,666 20 08/22/05 08:58 PM
by ShroomOmatic
* Bush: Former aides won't testify in fired prosecutors case discombobulate 314 1 07/09/07 05:38 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* Bush Administration's Disregard For The EPA monoamine 423 2 09/24/03 07:18 PM
by monoamine
* Bush Administration Most Corrupt In US History
( 1 2 all )
ekomstop 2,322 34 11/01/04 02:46 AM
by Rose
* Millionaire Offers $100,000 For Scientific Proof WTC Towers Collapsed As Bush Administration Claims
( 1 2 all )
ekomstop 3,044 37 12/16/04 10:29 PM
by ekomstop
* Bush administration rewarded the Taliban for 'controlling' the opium crop! LSDempire 1,185 14 08/29/05 11:54 PM
by Redstorm
* Updates on the Bush Administration's environmental record starptv23 279 0 03/13/05 09:41 PM
by starptv23

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, Enlil
1,647 topic views. 1 members, 1 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
High Mountain Compost
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.1 seconds spending 0.003 seconds on 16 queries.