Sibel Edmonds movie Panel discussion: James Bamford, Robert Parry, film directors (plus Waxman news)

[lukery]

While we wait for word from Henry Waxman's office about whether he will hold the hearings that he has promised into FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds' case, I've got some footage of the panel discussion that was conducted after the US premiere screening in February. Panel members include James Bamford and Robert Parry, with an introduction by Sibel. Footage and some selected quotes downstairs.

I always try to look for new ways of recruiting people to the Sibel cause. One line from the panel that got a hearty applause was when director Mathieu Verboud said that the people who tried to recruit Sibel to spy for them at the FBI (ed: essentially Richard Perle and Douglas Feith) "are the (same) people who set up the war effort in Iraq - by falsifying intelligence information to make this country go to war." In other words, if you are against the Iraq war, then you might consider lending your support to Sibel so that we can punish the people involved.

(I've also got a brief update regarding the proposed hearings downstairs.)

On February 3, Kill The Messenger, a documentary about FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds' case, was shown in DC - followed by a panel discussing "the current state of the U.S. Main media, unconstitutional government secrecy, and national security whistleblowers."

Panel members were James Bamford, Robert Parry, Mathieu Verboud, Ben Wizner (ACLU), Stephen Kohn, (Chairman, National Whistleblower Center), Kristina Borjesson (journalist). All bios available here.

I finally have video footage of the event - presented here in two clips. Firstly, a nine minute introduction by Sibel and the directors, and a 9 minute video of selected snips from the panel. I've included some of the quotes below in text form (all errors are mine)

Introductory clip:
http://www.youtube.com/v/_ncoLo4pdCk

Selected quotes:

Sibel Edmonds:

I'm a US citizen, I did not commit any crime, and they issued all these gag orders and they said I don't have my First Amendment right, I don't have my Fourth Amendment right, Fifth Amendment right. They had the Federal court here in DC going along with it... I went to Congress, they didn't do anything. I went to the Mainstream Media, they couldn't care less, really. Sure, it was a 'sensational' story - a whistleblower was fired and gagged, but nobody within the Mainstream Media ever asked 'Why the State Secrets Privilege? You know, she was a language specialist, it's not as if she was an undercover agent, or an informant... Why would they go to such an length to gag her?'

Not a single person within the US Mainstream Media ever asked this question. They didn't want to know. It was all about the firing aspect of it - and even that died down. So, we have a fantastic panel here to talk about that aspect of it...

Jean Viallet (Co-director) :

One brief thing, to tell you the truth - because this film is about the truth - Why did French people do this film? Because nobody in America did it.' (applause)

Mathieu Verboud (Co-director):

The lesson that we draw from Sibel Edmonds' story is that Washington power is for sale, and has been for sale for a long time. The people in positions of power in this country really sell their influence, to the highest bidder.

In this respect, it's no surprise that foreign agents were able to sneak into this country and do the dirty operations that they did. These people are living proof to the notion of conflict of interest - because these people work for governments, but they are also highly connected to the military-industrial-conflict, they draft, and implement, national security policies, and at the same time they work for foreign governments, as agents of influence for foreign governments.

And Sibel, those who I consider to be your enemies in this case are people who have been opposing for years and years, all arms-reduction treaties - be it bacteriological, chemical, nuclear, conventional - for years. Douglas Feith is the only guy, as I understand, in the annals of foreign policy in the US who, on a personal basis, always opposes any kind of arms reduction. You know, this guy should work for the Iranian government, but no, he works for the US government.

These people, as we have said in the film, have been passing secret information to Israel for the last 30 years. These people have been on the Turkish payroll. And the very people who wanted to sign Sibel are the people who set up the war effort in Iraq - by falsifying intelligence information to make this country go to war. (applause)

Panel Clip
http://www.youtube.com/v/zErC1zx-ep0

Selected quotes:

Mathieu Verboud (Co-director):

In Sibel's case, and in many other cases, we know the crime, we know the rational for the crime. Qui bono? We can also answer this question. We know the bad guys, and yet, the rest of the story is... nothing.

Robert Parry:

It's a great documentary, it's the kind of thing we should see a lot more of, and it shouldn't always have to be done by people outside of the United States.

Stephen Kohn (Attorney):

Sibel is the perfect example - they tried every single trick in the book to silence her - and yes they defeated her legal claims, but that's a minimum defeat. Is Sibel Edmonds silenced?

Robert Parry:

In the 1980s we saw this idea that became more and more popular, and it was really brought to us by the people we now call the neoconservatives, and it was called 'Perception Management.' They understood that if they could control how the American public perceived events around the world, they could control the American people, and all the power and money that goes through that.

James Bamford:

A lot of the things that have come out, and they didn't come out until Sibel started looking into this, but that's where a lot of the secrets are being hidden behind the State Secrets Privilege, are those enormous cooperative agreements between not only countries, but individuals and groups - between the American Turkish Council, AIPAC, groups like that. And those things are the hardest things of all to come out in this country - because you can't get anyone at all in the Mainstream Media, or even to some degree, the alternative media - to write about that - and those things are really the most important things to come out...

James Bamford:

We had Jimmy Carter come out with his book, and the Mearsheimer & Walt report come out, so there is an opening up of the questioning of our relationship, and also the questioning of how much money is going in, and how much pressure is coming out from AIPAC, and all those groups.

Robert Parry:

We've now reached a point in the US where we don't even report stories about how the very fundamental ideas of our country have been altered. What happened after 911, and the beginning of the War On Terror is that we've ultimately had a change in the whole framework of our government - we do not have inalienable rights any more.

Robert Parry:

If we wanted to honest, we'd go into the 5th grade classes and civics classes around the country and we'd take out the civics books and throw them away - because that doesn't exist any more. (applause)

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

Other film news:
If you haven't seen the trailer for the film yet, you can watch it here. I've also got a stirring one minute speech by Sibel from the film here.

And no, I still haven't heard any word about when the film will be available in the US. I promise you'll be the first to know - you can check in at my blog regarding the film here

The film was recently shown here in Australia and was well received (I was chatting about the film over dinner in a restaurant the night after it was shown, and people sitting at neighboring tables had seen it and wanted to join in the conversation.)

The film was recently shown at the Chicago International Documentary Film Festival. It was described
thusly:
"Possibly the festival's most radioactive entry, this 2006 documentary for French TV centers on FBI whistle-blower Sibel Edmonds, who was fired from the bureau's translation unit in March 2002 and subsequently claimed she'd seen evidence of money laundering, narcotics trafficking, and participation in the nuclear black market. "
Radioactive is right. Particularly in Chicago, home of Dennis Hastert.

The reviews from the French press are here

Sibel's credibility:
I still read comments around the place doubting Sibel's credibility for some reason. My co-blogger Miguel recently wrote The Incredibly, Credible Sibel which outlined "3 solid sources that give important credence to Sibel's story." We also have some new data points.



James Bamford:

"I just want to supply my support to Sibel's effort here. I think she's been doing a fantastic job of trying to get this out there, and all the listeners out there, I hope they join in with their support."

Phil Giraldi:

Edmonds is no crackpot and is considered to be a credible witness, most of whose charges were substantiated both by former FBI officials in 2002 and by the Department of Justice in 2005.

John Cole(Veteran FBI agent, counterintelligence/counter-terrorism in DC, later head of Counter-Intelligence for Pakistan & Afghanistan) in Kill The Messenger:

I wanted to meet her cos I wanted to help her. I felt that maybe I could be of some assistance to her because I knew she was doing the right thing. I knew she was right. But I wanted to hear her side of the story.

I was talking to FBI colleagues in the administrative division who had read her file, who had read the investigative report and they were telling me a different story. They were telling me that Sibel Edmonds was a 100% accurate, that management knew that she was correct.

Cole was actually working on a case related to Sibel's - and he too has reported the details of the case to both the Dept of Justice's Inspector General and Congress.


Waxman hearings:
We still haven't heard anything from Waxman. It is very frustrating. Since we launched the campaign in early March, Waxman and his office has stopped returning calls to people from many people/organizations (ACLU, POGO, GAP, Open the Government, Liberty Coalition) who are used to getting their calls to his office returned immediately. Phil Giraldi recently outlined his take on Waxman's apparent reluctance here

We don't know why Waxman has gone silent all of a sudden - but we have decided to give him until the end of this week to give us an answer. If we don't hear anything from him by then, then we'll be asking you to get on the phones to his office again. We'll launch that new campaign in conjunction with a few other goodies that we have up our sleeve that we'll be announcing next week.

Stay tuned.

Thanks again for your support. Please let me know if you want me to email you when I have new Sibel-related information/posts. At a minimum, it helps the information get on the 'recommended' list here which means that more people become aware of Sibel's case.


cross-posted at http://sibeledmonds.blogspot.com/2007/04/sibel-edmonds-movie-panel-discussion.html

[AuntPatsy]

1. Trully amazing how little the truth accomplishes when dealing with

such high ranking criminals being held accountable, the very fact that this case is still being argued years past is frightening for our justice system.

[lukery]

2. it's very frustrating

but we'll get there.

[AuntPatsy]

5. Lately I am becoming a bit more optimistic but I can tell you if this is

what it feels like attempting to scale mount everest we are not giving enough credit to those taking on that incredible feat where casualties are to be expected...

[lukery]

7. compared to this?

everest would be easy...

[AuntPatsy]

11. True,, I just feel like those fighting this fight don't recieve enough

credit, could it be perhaps because those doing things like climbing a mountain seems more exciting and newsworthy?

Sometimes I feel that far too many people would rather be entertained and do not find such news entertaining enough to hold their attention which could be the reason why the process for justice is so unaccountably slow.

[lukery]

12. perhaps people elect congresscritters...

so the people can outsource worrying about this stuff to their congrescritters...

where the hell are the congresscritters? are they all watching American Idol too?

[rodeodance]

3. I am so thandful to these groups/people who are keep this alive.

[rodeodance]

4. says here Waxman promised on Dem hearings: (if not support Israel)

Congressman Waxman is regarded as close to Israel's principal lobby, AIPAC, and even promised Jewish voters back in November 2006 that there would be no Democratic congressional committee chairmen involved with Middle Eastern policy who were not completely supportive of Israel.

[lukery]

15. he sure did promise

and now....?

[mmonk]

22. Loyalty to AIPAC should never trump

our security, a wronged public servant pushing the truth, or the American people in general.

[Peace Patriot]

23. You can be a supporter of Israel--the real Israel, its people and its culture--without

supporting war profiteers and injustice. I hope this is what Congr. Waxman responds to. AIPAC and the NeoCons have done no good whatsoever for Israel or for support for Israel among the American people. Their lies and skulduggery to drag the US into this unjust, illegal, heinous war on Iraq, and to destroy our democracy and force the American people into war, will live in infamy.

The way to support Israel is to advocate for the peaceful integration of Israel into the Middle East, and the just treatment of the people that it displaced some forty years ago. The way to DESTROY Israel is to promote the rightwing, war profiteer view that Israel must become an armed medieval fortress, bristling with armaments--an untenable existence in which democracy cannot survive. How convenient that rightwing vision is to the purveyors of tanks and bullets and torture!

I am not one who thinks that Israel and its US lobbyists and NeoCon agents are primarily responsible for the Iraq War, but they have supported and enabled this unholy alliance of the Oil Cartel, Bushite fascists, 'christian' nutballs, US war profiteers, and the war profiteering corporate news monopolies, who have hijacked the US military, and are using our troops as cannon fodder and are robbing us blind, literally draining our treasury into the pockets of Bush cronies--and not just our existing cash but with trillions of dollars in debt for decades to come. Debt that will fall upon the backs of the poor, while the Bushes and their super-rich friends laugh all the way to their Cayman Island banks. They have furthermore created and larded our money upon horrors like the Blackwater mercenary army--which now wants to train its death squads in San Diego--and the murderers and drug traffickers being run by the Colombian government, to which they have given $4 billion of our money, to kill thousands of union organizers, community leaders and peasants.

This is what the rightwing war profiteers in Israel have associated Israel with! They are as crazy and as fascist as the Bushites. But I don't for one minute believe that Israel's rightwing represents the Israeli people any more than I believe that the Bush Junta represents us. We are all the slaves of war profiteers.

I think I do understand the kneejerk support for Israel by politicians like Waxman, and their overly protective attitude. I'm Irish and I wouldn't want my fellow and sister Americans judging the Irish cause on the basis of actions committed by men in love with violence, and who alienated themselves from humanity to such a degree that they could blow up innocent civilians because they were English. I can understand becoming that desperate, but I don't condone it. I think it is immoral, and ALSO stupid strategy. War is ALWAYS stupid. ALWAYS. It never achieves righteous ends. It always comes back to bite you. Even WW II, which, to appearances, was that rare thing--a just war. Look what the failure to demobilize that huge war machine of WW II has led to! The oil cartel hijacking it all for a corporate resource war--an imperial war! Just like the Nazis! Just like the Japanese imperialists!

But to get back to Ireland, it is unfair that the peaceful people of Ireland and their very rightful demands for self-determination and justice are forever associated with the IRA and its murderous activities. The same for the Palestinians, and other Arab and Muslim peoples, the vast majority of whom want peace, justice and prosperity, and whose entire global society has been stained by violent jihadists. And the same for the Israeli people, trapped as they are in a bad strategic situation, at the mercy of their own warmongers and war profiteers. All of us are inclined to blindly support some cause, or some tribe, and to look the other way when violence is used in support of just claims--especially in David and Goliath situations. In Palestine, for instance, you have the Palestinians facing the Goliath of the US/Israel. What hope have they of any justice? But from the Israeli point of view, Israel faces the Goliath of the surrounding Arab and Muslim states that have always been hostile to the creation of Israel. The Palestinians feel isolated and desperate, and justify violence. The Israelis feel the same--isolated and desperate, and justified in violence against the Palestinians, and also at involving the US in dominating and controlling their Middle Eastern neighbors, which, by definition, means denying self-determination to those peoples. (This is how Israel could be involved with the US and UK in 1954 in TOPPLING Iran's democracy and inflicting the Iranian people with 25 years of torture and oppression under the horrible Shah of Iran. Israel saw its self-interest served by having a western-installed tyrant over the Iranians--something WE may have forgotten, but the Iranians have not.)

Possibly the worst thing that the Bush Junta has done is its efforts to weaken the UN--and also the Geneva Conventions and other constraints on war. Because that is where disputes like these belong--in the UN, and in the World Court, where injustice has a chance to be resolved without violence. Violence benefits no one, except the bastards who sell weapons.

Henry Waxman is an extremely intelligent man, and a bulldog of an investigator. I hope he sees the common sense and justice in what I'm saying. I hope he acts in Israel's TRUE interest--the interest of peace and prosperity for all in the Middle East. Exposing AIPAC's dirty war profiteering will HELP Israel's cause, not hurt it. I remember when the women's peace movement arose in Ireland. It was then I could stop shrinking in mortification at the violence of the IRA, and feel proud of my own ancestry. Violence then no longer defined by grandmother's home country. The vast majority of people in EVERY country want peace and fairness. It is the demagogues and war profiteers on all sides of every conflict who deny it to them.

[lukery]

27. thnx for the very thoughful post n/t

[cascadiance]

34. Peace Patriot, well stated...

In addition to trying to work for Sibel's cause where I can here in San Diego, I've also recently started working with the local Dem media relations committee here. You mention the Blackwater mess here. This committee is very cognizant of what's going on there, and is looking to do some things about it. You'll note that Bob Filner recently exposed that these people somehow, THEY claim "accidentally", only conveniently notified Duncan Hunter of their plans to try and fast track approval of giving Blackwater this land against the wishes of the Potrero Hill residents here and many others here in San Diego, and did NOT notify Filner's office of these plans, even though a big chunk of this acreage also is in his district too!

These folks are on a war path, and are trying to cut corners wherever they can. The folks I'm talking with definitely have concerns about the depths of visciousness in how they might respond if we really went after them, but I noted that Jeremy Scahill as one person has been pretty outspoken in his counteracting these folks with his "Blackwater" book and his tour talking about this book, and therefore we should follow his lead to help us all feel safer. There's a lot of that fear everyplace that we also have to contend with when we try to help people deal with issues like Blackwater and the ones that Sibel is dealing with. We need to come up with ways of helping people feel empowered and not feel that fear so that they can feel less risk in trying to understand more what these issues are all about and help us do something about them.

Luke, I think that is the big challenge here. Even the Democrats in Congress seem to be walking timidly around so many issues now. When I hear Bernie Sanders on Thom Hartmann's podcast from Friday talking about how he thinks impeachment is perhaps not something we should be focused on, I KNOW there must be a lot of pressure put on these people too. Bernie is the last person I'd expect to have that sort of attitude on this subject. We have to find some way to liberate people from their fears. Then they will embrace and hear what Sibel has to say I think.

K&R

[mmonk]

37. The problem is trying to understand that fear.

Whatever it is that has such power in our country to the point good people working for the best interests of their country get run over, one must question how involved is such power in our political system. Does it reach an irredeemable unresolvable point? Is it monied corporate or a huge interconnecting group of many groups?

[cascadiance]

38. Yes, this is the key, and hopefully we all feel comfortable talking about it!

I'm sure that there are many here that won't even want to mention some of their more deep seated fears here on this board, and they may be pretty real. But if there are those of you reading this thread that do have some that they feel they can't talk about, then you know what I'm talking about. Extrapolate that to many others in the media, in congress, in local governments, the U.S. attorneys of course now, and many other places.

Fortunately we have some folks with lots of courage like Sibel, who put aside those attempts at trying to inflict fear in them, but folks like Sibel who can work through fears are probably more the exception rather than the rule.

I'm guessing that if we ask Jeremy Scahill how he feels and what really is going on behind the scenes too, he probably has many fears he's working through now too when doing what he does.

This is what the excessive secrecy that Bushco has pushed onto us really magnifies into. And perhaps that's another way to sell it to others, as Sibel did in that speech. That if there were less secrets built into every fabric of our society, then collectively those of us with good will would feel less fear and feel more confident at stepping forward now.

But it does seem like we have a chicken/egg problem now where people are still too afraid to act until they have reason to believe that their immediate fears are allayed.

Perhaps others here can come up with other solutions to alleviating folks' fears now. Maybe we can look at fears in the abstract for each profession (i.e the media) and try to ask ourselves what gets them fearful and not be too specific. If there are ways that can be legislated to help them feel less fearful (through special whistleblower protection provisions or other worker protections, that those fired Fox TV station reporters trying to report on Monsanto's practices did NOT have), maybe that will collectively help them without forcing them to take risks now.

If we can find a good reason why congress critters are the most afraid to do things, perhaps there's something that the grass roots can do to help this too. We perhaps need to start with them, as the Democratic Congress is where we'll need to start likely to help others with getting rid of whatever they fear.

[mmonk]

39. From a grassroots perspective,

does it become harder to determine who the good guys are?

[cascadiance]

40. I agree... It is more of the chicken and the egg issue again...

Another thing is to find out what the nerve endings are for who's really responsible for trying to keep this culture of secrecy alive. Is it the K-Street connection to Congress? What pieces there?

Perhaps a good acid test to find who is a good guy and who isn't is to find out whether they've taken a public position, or better yet public actions supporting efforts to shut down or disable those nerve centers (like Clean Elections legislation from my perspective). Clean Elections takes out the bribery quotient, which I suspect is a big factor in these guys keeping their secrets/fear supported power.

That is why, as nice as Barack Obama sounds, and as much grass roots support that he can show with his donations, I'm still waiting for him to come out and publicly state and back up with actions, some leadership in doing something like Clean Elections campaign finance reform before I jump in and support him. Bill Richardson just indicated without being prompted by a question that he supports public campaign financing on Laura Flanders over the weekend, and stepped up a notch in my book for doing so.

[mmonk]

41. Richardson has stepped up to the plate

alot recently. He seems to be divesting himself a little bit from things that bother me and thus, has sparked my interest. It hasn't gone unnoticed by me.

[blm]

44. I see that, too, and hope it isn't meant to pull us along at some point towards those

he worked closely with in the past.

[mmonk]

45. I don't see how he could.

We have our eyes wide open. Those currently being drawn in are looking for solutions and will bolt.

[blm]

46. heh - you know me - I have to look at every angle possible with the power crowd.

.

[mmonk]

47. And that's the smart tact to take.

[Rex]

50. I don't trust the Israeli government, but I imagine the people are just

like Americans - they want a better world. I don't trust my government, but I do trust Henry Waxman and real trust in an elected official is a rarity IMO. Waxman will do the right thing, he believes in the people of both nations. And like you said, he is a real bulldog when it comes to the truth.

Chomp chomp!

[jeff uppy]

51. Super post.

It's starting to feel like more and more members of Congress are questioning the "AIPAC = Israel's Best Interest" formula lately. Maybe it's wishful thinking but it's a feeling I get.

[lukery]

52. let's see...

"members of Congress are questioning the "AIPAC = Israel's Best Interest" formula"

it'll be interesting to see if it gets us anywhere... i wouldn't hold my breath.

[mmonk]

54. I'm sure not.

[lukery]

8. not least, sibel

we owe her.

[blm]

18. Keeping serious corruption issues alive is a thankless task for these people because most DC

powerstructure in both both parties do NOT want it uncovered in full - it's been one long continuous crime wave that touches and spans administrations - popular administrations.

So the good guys who actually FIGHT to uncover government corruption and fight FOR open government are the ones targeted for the takedown, time and time again.

[lukery]

33. spot on

sibel's case covers the previous administration as well - that's part of the problem...

...but if the dems can't clean out their own house, then i won't support them either

[rodeodance]

6. RECOMMEND.

[enough]

9. And another.

[lukery]

10. dkos version

here
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/23/74643/2369

feel free to go rec over there.

i've nearly (fianlly!) convinced the crowd over there that this stuff is important

[lukery]

13. apparently monday morning is a terrible time to post n/t

[DemReadingDU]

14. K&R

Thanks for all your articles about Sibel!

[mmonk]

21. Not necessarily a bad time.

People are getting into their routines and it might take a little longer to respond. Of course, there is never a bad time to post this information.

[lukery]

28. i got NUTHIN at dkos

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/23/74643/2369

and those guys love me now!

[mmonk]

36. Then everyone who can needs to go over there

and recommend and comment if possible.

[Blackhatjack]

16. Here is a slightly different way to attack this problem....

The 'State Secrets Privilege' is the mechanism that is being used to keep Sibel silent and the information getting out into the public domain.

Instead of contacting Senators and Representatives about their stance on Sibel Edmonds, there needs to be a survey conducted of every Senator and Representative by inquiries from their constituents on the specific issue "Do you support our Government's unilateral and unreviewable use of a State Secrets Privilege to silence individuals who wish to share important information with their elected representatives?" Remind them that the answers received in this survey will be reported in the Senator and Representative's voting district, and on the internet.

Make a tally sheet placing each Senator in either a Yes or No Column. Send out a notice of a press conference on the steps of Congress, pass out results of survey, and display a large sign with the results of the survey. Videotape the press conference and put it on the web.

By concentrating on the State Secrets Privilege and their Yes/No support for it, constituents should be able to get a response. However, if they refuse to respond, remind them that the failure to respond will be reported as well.

[lukery]

20. thnx. not a bad idea.

unfortunately, i suspect that they will all say 'hell, yes'

as sibel says in the first video - there are 96 million pieces of classified info in the USG right now...

[Blackhatjack]

24. So True... but there is a 'process' for classifying and eventually 'declassifying' information

The American people do not readily accept 'individuals' making decisions on what will remain secret without some framework for its eventual declassification. The Plame case classification issues proved that.

However, there is no framework for 'oversight and review' and eventual declassification of information summarily silenced by the use of the 'State Secrets Privilege.' And when the State Secrets Privilege interferes with the right of Americans to communicate with their elected representative, people can identify with that as being wrong.

Whoever is the elected President in 2008 will have to address the 'secrecy' that has been embedded in government operations by this Administration. The public will not support continued secrecy by individuals without checks and balances. And I predict it will be driven by the fiasco that is occurring in Iraq.

When huge sums of money are wasted, lost and looted, and tied to overall disasterous results in a war of choice, there will be 'an after action report' demanded by the American people.

We need to fit the Sibel Edmonds action into this mosaic.

[lukery]

26. so true

i think that rather than:

"Do you support our Government's unilateral and unreviewable use of a State Secrets Privilege to silence individuals who wish to share important information with their elected representatives?"

we shuold ask:

"do you support treason?"

that ought to resonate better...

more seriously: "We need to fit the Sibel Edmonds action into this mosaic." - yep, yep and yep.

more generally though - in an ideal world, we'd totally extract 'sibel edmonds' from the entire conversation. the real issue has nothing to do with sibel - the real issue is 'do we like people like feith and perle becoming rich through treason?'

[Blackhatjack]

35. The art of persuasion spells out the pathway to success....

You identify the core result that you are attempting to persuade your opponent or uninformed listener to adopt.

You strip away non-essential factual specifics that prevent your target from identifying with the higher goal you are proposing.

You frame the issue in terms of how the argued position is essential to upholding the principles we all agree upon (ie. democratic form of government and liberties that flow therefrom).

In this particular case, by proving the higher goal (that unilateral and unreviewable use of a State Secrets Privilege is unreconcilable with a democratic form of government) we have moved the location of the battle to ground favorable to the outcome we desire.

Is the unfettered telling of Sibel Edmonds' story essential? Yes.
Do we have to have Sibel Edmonds out front carrying the flag to succeed? No.

Once we succeed in persuading the Congressional representatives to adopt our position, then we address the individuals bearing responsibility for implementing policies of this Administration which are destroying our democracy(Feith, Perle, Wolfowitz, etc.).

I think we need to be smart, and understand that a well executed plan will leave our Congressional representatives little ground to stand on in opposing us. Once we get them nodding in agreement with us, we turn the screws on the individuals who deserve investigation and prosecution, and move to get Sibel a forum to tell her story before Congress.

[blm]

32. That depends on WHO the Democratic president is, doesn't it? An anti-corruption,

open government Democrat or another Dem administration that chooses to protect secrecy and privilege of past administrations?


http://www.depauw.edu/news/index.asp?id=13354

Whom does the biographer think his subject will pick as a running mate? Not Hillary Rodham Clinton. "There's really two different Democratic parties right now: there's the Clintons

and Terry McAuliffe and the DNC and then there's the Kerry upstarts. John Kerry had one of the great advantages in life by being considered to get the nomination in December. He watched every Democrat in the country flee from him, and the Clintons really stick the knife in his back a bunch of times, so he's able to really see who was loyal to him and who wasn't. That's a very useful thing in life."



http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward

http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk1k0nUWEQg

[mmonk]

17. Thanks as usual lukery.

[KoKo]

19. Notice that a link to Giraldi article was in

"American Conservative" which is Pat Buchanan and Takki (somethings) magazine. Is it possible she can get some help from the conservatives who have been worried about AIPAC and other sources involvement in our government?

Sometimes folks need help from odd sources to get their message out. And, while Buchanan is not anyone many Dems would want to be allied with...I wonder how many supporters "American Conservative" has that could be a help to getting more backing for Waxman hearings for Sibel...or would they be more of a hindrance?

[lukery]

25. the original petition was 'tripartisan'

"30 liberal, libertarian and conservative groups are calling on Henry Waxman's House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to hold hearings on the case of gagged FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds."
http://letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com/2007/03/transpartisan-coalition-calls-for.html


you make a good point - we need all the friends that we can get


my articles/interviews have even been published at Townhall. some of our biggest suppoerters in the blogosphere think that the two greatest people on earth are George Bush and SIbel Edmonds!

[FourScore]

29. This is important.

K&R

[StateSecrets]

30. K & R

Thank you Lukery.

Jean Viallet: 'Why did French people do this film? Because nobody in America did it.' Excellent point; loaded, yet, short & sweet.

[lukery]

31. and then there was DAvid Rose

and English journo writing for VF.

what the hell is wrong with american journos?

[ajeffersonian]

42. Good post - keep Sibel's case in public view

Thanks Lukery, for a well articulated post, and for continuing to keep us informed. And it is heartening to see these posts from the community - who obviously understand the importance of Sibel's case. Would that we could find a way to widen the participation. I wonder, when Americans hear about Sibel's case, or see or hear her very thought provoking speeches - do they stop and think - maybe next time it will be me? What the government has done to Sibel in attempting to silence her it can and will do to ANY U.S. citizen who attempts to make known what the government does not want to be known. Sibel was denied that most basic right "guaranteed" by our Constitution, the right to access to the Courts. When that access can be denied to ANY citizen, it can be denied to ALL - where then can we turn for protection from an oppressive government? Do Waxman and the others in Congress that have knowledge of Sibel's case understand this? I hope they do, but so far I don't see any evidence. Keep up the posts, keep up the conversation, keep Sibel's case in the public's sight - we can make a difference.

"The purpose of government is to enable the people of a nation to live in safety and happiness. Government exists for the interests of the governed, not for the governors." Thomas Jefferson

[mmonk]

43. There are obviously inoperable parts of our constitution now.

That's it's so widely accepted as ok by our elected officials is the most troubling aspect of the last few years.

[StateSecrets]

49. Well-put

Jeffersonian, well-put as always:-)

[mmonk]

48. .

:kick:

[pberq]

53. thanks, lukery. and please put me on the email list

[lukery]

55. what is your email address? n/t