New York Times Deletes This Paragraph In Which White House Says AIPAC Is Key To War

[Vinnie From Indy]

102. Please feel free to believe the Sibel Edmonds myth if that is your pleasure.

As for my having it in for her, you are incorrect! I simply believe her to be a liar. The fact is that she really only worked at the FBI for 24 weeks and even then it was a part-time job. I believe she has stated in her deposition that she worked roughly 20 hours a week. From that very brief stint at the FBI, Edmonds has built her entire claim to fame.

This article details some of her nonsense about Jan Schakowski.

***************************************************************
The problem for Ms Edmonds is that she was a translator and not an analyst. She even admits to having never seen the original files which have been put into storage. The timeline for the whole thing makes less and less sense when one delves into it. First of all, Ms Edmonds was hired in the aftermath of 9/11 and is suppose to be doing counter terrorism related work. Instead, she is placed on this case which has been ongoing for six years. Ok, if this was an important case, why had they not hired a translator before then to go through these intercepted communications? It is not like Turkish is a hard language to find translators for. It is not like Farsi, a language that caused MI6 to try and get an opera singer to join their ranks so that he could translate.

There are other issues here that need to be addressed. For instance, these communications appear to implicate many members of the Republican Congressional leadership at a time when they are looking for anything to take down President Bill Clinton. Why would Clinton not just leak this, or better yet, make the tapes available to the media since it appears that they had enough information to continue this going for some time? After all, being blackmailed by Turkish spies trumps the President getting a few blowjobs in the oval office. Ok, failing that, how much damage could this information have done if released, say, two weeks before the 2000 election? If this had any substance, by that point, they would have used it for political advantage.

The other direction is true as well. Why did President George W. Bush, a man who was more than willing to use anything at his disposal to smear the Democrats, not use this information to hurt Jan Schakowsky. By the time that it came out that others were compromised, it would have been too late.

The problem for Ms Edmonds is that she has not only staked her reputation on this issue, but it is largely why she was fired. She was fired for continuing to pursue this case based upon the information that she found in the translated communications even when she was told to drop it. Ms Edmonds has also staked the reputation of the organization she works with regarding federal whistleblowers, and risks perjury charges if it is discovered that she unknowingly lied under oath. She also risks derailing an entire case. There is a lot more riding on this for her than there is for Rep. Schakowsky. In fact, other than the American Conservative and the blogosphere, this has not even shown up as being on the radar of most of the media probably for the same reason that this entire case troubles me.

http://lezgetreal.com/2009/09/rep-schakowskys-lesbian-turkish-affair-seems-to-make-absolutely-no-sense/
************************************************************
In addition, contrary to exploiting her own circumstances, she has been essential to helping support other whistleblowers expose Bush Administration wrongdoing.

The facts certainly do not support this statement at all. Edmonds is selling her "memoirs" right now on Amazon and she strongly encourages donations at her boiling frogs web site.