• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Motivation for a new investigation

And the three specific items you mentioned have nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11. So tell me, what in your post links the three items to 9/11?

Sibel Edmonds was hired as an FBI translator after 9/11. The lack of competent translators is clearly mentioned as a problem in Staff Statement #12 from the 9/11 Commission:

"According to a recent report by the Department of Justice Inspector General, “the FBI shortages of linguists have resulted in thousands of hours of audiotapes and pages of written material not being reviewed or translated in a timely manner.” The choice is between foregoing access to potentially relevant conversations and obtaining such conversations that remain untranslated. Despite the recent hire of 653 new linguists, demand exceeds supply. Shortages of translators in languages such as Arabic, Urdu, Farsi, and Pashto remain a barrier to the FBI’s understanding of the terrorist threat."

According to The Independent,

"Sibel Edmonds said she spent more than three hours in a closed session with the commission's investigators providing information that was circulating within the FBI in the spring and summer of 2001 suggesting that an attack using aircraft was just months away and the terrorists were in place...She told The Independent yesterday: "I gave [the commission] details of specific investigation files, the specific dates, specific target information, specific managers in charge of the investigation. I gave them everything so that they could go back and follow up. This is not hearsay. These are things that are documented. These things can be established very easily."

Should her 3 hour plus testimony be made public?

Regarding the reason she was gagged, she stated,

"This gag was invoked not to protect sensitive diplomatic relations but criminal activities involving US officials who were endangering US national security."

This seems to be the case as the London Sunday Times reports,

"She says the FBI was investigating a Turkish and Israeli-run network that paid high-ranking American officials to steal nuclear weapons secrets. These were then sold on the international black market to countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. One of the documents relating to the case was marked 203A-WF-210023. Last week, however, the FBI responded to a freedom of information request for a file of exactly the same number by claiming that it did not exist. But The Sunday Times has obtained a document signed by an FBI official showing the existence of the file."

It is strange that the international press did report this story somewhat, but in the United States it 'fell dead-born from the press.' The American Press is largely interested in reporting sensationalism, celebrity gossip, and the horse-race aspect to American politics. Journalists are strikingly ignorant on a host of issues. If they weren’t, Bush and the neo-cons could have never gotten away with the WMD lie.
 
Last edited:
5 years old; no Pulitzer?? Why?. Why did Ed Bradley fail to get a Pulitzer with this great story of, nothing? Oh.

This tripe is old.
 
Last edited:
There has not been a single VALID reason to date presented by the Twoof movement that constitutes a new investigation. You would be wasting millions of dollars just to come to the same conclusions. 19 terrorists twoofers. Grow up.
 
Motivation for a new investigation?

This thread confuses me. Who exactly is supposed to be "motivated"? Us? I'm not sure if you've been paying attention, Greg, but most of us here don't believe this nonsense.

If you want a new investigation go out and make it happen. No one is stopping you. These ridiculous and repetitive threads are a waste of everyone's time.
 
It's been over 7 years, the iceberg has melted.
In the truther mind what is shown to be utterly foolish gets recycled every three years sort of like the 17 year cycle of the magicicadia (Which is more deserving of respect than any sub-human truther).
 
This thread confuses me. Who exactly is supposed to be "motivated"? Us? I'm not sure if you've been paying attention, Greg, but most of us here don't believe this nonsense.

If you want a new investigation go out and make it happen. No one is stopping you. These ridiculous and repetitive threads are a waste of everyone's time.


This should be stickied!
It's been third, and long... forever!!11))0000llll
 
Even though politically I lean towards you, Gregory, and not with Brainster, I am nonetheless compelled to agree with his reasoning.

This story of Ms. Edmonds is a very strange one, if it is at all true. She seems to know a fantastic amount of secret information -- the whole trifecta is there, nuclear smuggling, 9/11 foreknowledge and collaboration, coverups at the highest levels and in all branches of the U.S. Government. Yet, she shares so little that is actionable. No names. No definitions. No coherent explanation for how she would know of these things in the first place, either the deeds themselves or the coverups.

Are we expected to believe she won't tell us this because of a "gag order?" What are they going to do, kill her if she tells us any details?

Any of us, if actually given such knowledge, wouldn't be held by a gag order. Or a death threat. We'd record it, run off 100 copies, send it to every major newspaper we could find here and abroad. That's what. Assuming the knowledge was genuine, that is.

If it's all a bluff, on the other hand, her behavior suddenly becomes very easy to interpret.

I want to see some reliable corroboration before giving Ms. Edmonds such an enormous benefit of the doubt. If it's there, then I'll join you in a call for investigations. Ones that, incidentally, have nothing to do with Sept. 11th, but would easily stand on their own.

One lone nut with an axe to grind just doesn't meet the burden of proof.
 
Why do your sources contradict each other?

My "sources" contradict each other because one of them is Sibel and the other is the article she's citing as a reference. I have another example of a lie she told just in that open letter to the commission, but I'm holding that one back for now.

Sibel comes off as Nancy Drew. The charge that got her on 60 Minutes was that her boss was telling her to go slow at work so they could get increased funding for the department. Shocking, certainly and well-worth discussing. But since then her tales have gotten wilder and wilder. She got the (UK) Times to go with her nukes story early last year, but we later found out that one of the Times' reporters was a fruitcake himself, penning a classic cui bono for the Huffington Post about the Russian invasion of Georgia:

Who benefits most from painting this a revival of Soviet-era aggression?

John McCain.
 
Last edited:
Yes. In some respects Edmonds is just a more elaborate version of the folks who come on this forum claiming to have secret information and will show it to us in 'all due time'.
 
Sibel Edmonds was hired as an FBI translator after 9/11. The lack of competent translators is clearly mentioned as a problem in Staff Statement #12 from the 9/11 Commission:

"According to a recent report by the Department of Justice Inspector General, “the FBI shortages of linguists have resulted in thousands of hours of audiotapes and pages of written material not being reviewed or translated in a timely manner.” The choice is between foregoing access to potentially relevant conversations and obtaining such conversations that remain untranslated. Despite the recent hire of 653 new linguists, demand exceeds supply. Shortages of translators in languages such as Arabic, Urdu, Farsi, and Pashto remain a barrier to the FBI’s understanding of the terrorist threat."

According to The Independent,

"Sibel Edmonds said she spent more than three hours in a closed session with the commission's investigators providing information that was circulating within the FBI in the spring and summer of 2001 suggesting that an attack using aircraft was just months away and the terrorists were in place...She told The Independent yesterday: "I gave [the commission] details of specific investigation files, the specific dates, specific target information, specific managers in charge of the investigation. I gave them everything so that they could go back and follow up. This is not hearsay. These are things that are documented. These things can be established very easily."

Should her 3 hour plus testimony be made public?

Regarding the reason she was gagged, she stated,

"This gag was invoked not to protect sensitive diplomatic relations but criminal activities involving US officials who were endangering US national security."

This seems to be the case as the London Sunday Times reports,

"She says the FBI was investigating a Turkish and Israeli-run network that paid high-ranking American officials to steal nuclear weapons secrets. These were then sold on the international black market to countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. One of the documents relating to the case was marked 203A-WF-210023. Last week, however, the FBI responded to a freedom of information request for a file of exactly the same number by claiming that it did not exist. But The Sunday Times has obtained a document signed by an FBI official showing the existence of the file."

It is strange that the international press did report this story somewhat, but in the United States it 'fell dead-born from the press.' The American Press is largely interested in reporting sensationalism, celebrity gossip, and the horse-race aspect to American politics. Journalists are strikingly ignorant on a host of issues. If they weren’t, Bush and the neo-cons could have never gotten away with the WMD lie.
That was in the OP? So you guys are truthers and clairvoyants that communicate telepathically? How cute...
 
This film about Sibel Edmonds points to what I suspect is the tip of the iceberg that a new investigation would uncover. Sibel Edmonds describes, to the extent she is allowed, her knowledge of crimes of drug trafficing, illicit nuclear trade, and spying (illegally sharing intelligence) and their connection to terrorism. She states that the 9/11 Commission, the FBI, Justice department were aware of and chose to cover up these crimes.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6063340745569143497

Great movie. I knew about this case but not all of what this movie reveals. I never knew that some of them were investigated as far back as the seventies. And boy that Douglas Feith just can't get the smell of treason off of him can he?

It is funny though how some people will jump on this OP nine minutes later to dismiss an entire hour long documentary.

Well not really funny. Just typical around here.
 
Great movie. I knew about this case but not all of what this movie reveals. I never knew that some of them were investigated as far back as the seventies. And boy that Douglas Feith just can't get the smell of treason off of him can he?

It is funny though how some people will jump on this OP nine minutes later to dismiss an entire hour long documentary.

Well not really funny. Just typical around here.
So tell me oh clairvoyant one, what did the OP (in the OP) have to say about 9/11?
 
Well then there's that too. :cool:
If the sub-human sect aka the truth movement ever got anything correct in any of their videos (besides the date 9/11/2001) people may actually be inclined to watch some of their nonsense. Then again, maybe not...
 
Perhaps people have seen it already.


Impossible. Everyone knows that every conspiracy theorist has done so much research working against the government that if they haven't seen something before, then no one has seen it.

Also, every time the same information is posted, no matter how many times it'se been posted, it must be assumed that no one on the other "side" has seen it before.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom