GIRALDI ON SIBEL, THE MEDIA, AND CONGRESS

"From what I understand, from what she has to tell, it has a major difference from the Pentagon Papers in that it deals directly with criminal activity and may involve impeachable offenses. And I don't necessarily mean the President or the Vice-President, though I wouldn't be surprised if the information reached up that high. But other members of the Executive Branch may be impeached as well. And she says similar about Congress."
~ Daniel Ellsberg.

There's something on why Sibel Edmonds, whose "story about high level corruption in the United States government involving Turkey and Israel," must be heard, from Phil Giraldi at The Huffington Post:

Why should Sibel be heard? Mostly because her story, if true, involves corruption at the highest levels of government coupled with the sale of secrets vital to the security of the United States. One of her claims is that a senior State Department officer who has been identified as Marc Grossman, recorded by the FBI while arranging to pick up bribes from a Turkish organization, also revealed the identity of the CIA cover company Brewster Jennings to a Turkish contact in late 2001. The Turk then passed on the information to a Pakistani intelligence officer who presumably warned the AQ Khan nuclear proliferation network that the CIA was apparently pursuing. Some might call that treason and it should be noted that it occurred two years before Robert Novak's notorious exposure of Valerie Plame and Brewster Jennings which led to the conviction of Scooter Libby.

Not only does Giraldi rip the US media for its silence on Sibel's story, but he names those who've been approached with the story, and have ignored it. The question is: Why?

But the media remains silent in spite of considerable efforts to get them on board and provide some coverage of her very serious charges. Since the recent Sunday Times articles, her story has been brought to the attention of news editors at MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, to PBS's Bill Moyers, to The New York Times, The Washington Times, and to both ABC and CBS news in an attempt to arouse some interest. But there has been no response, not even a courteous "Thank you very much for contacting us...." What are so-called gadflies like Olbermann and Moyers afraid of? The suggestion that the media does not want to face the potential legal consequences of the gag order has been cited but lacks substance as much of the Sibel story is already out in public and the details of her allegations can be pieced together without actually interviewing her in violation of the state secrets privilege. Also, no one in the media has actually claimed that the lack of interest is based on the potential legal consequences. The silence has been deafening, suggesting that other forces are at work.

You see, journalists are supposed to investigate, delve into, examine, nose around, probe, pry, and scrutinize. But the servile American media today does not include anyone who's capable of digging into a story. They won't dig into it when you give them all the initial information. They won't look at it. As Giraldi notes, they won't even give you a response. Why? They're owned.

Gore Vidal said: "To keep information from the public is the function of the corporate media".

Noam Chomsky agrees and expands on the idea: "The media serve the interests of state and corporate power, which are closely interlinked, framing their reporting and analysis in a manner supportive of established privilege and limiting debate and discussion accordingly".

Edward Herman, who has collaborated with Chomsky on the manufacturing of consent in the US media further explains: "The propaganda system allows the U.S. Ieadership to commit crimes without limit and with no suggestion of misbehavior or criminality; in fact, major war criminals like Henry Kissinger appear regularly on TV to comment on the crimes of the derivative butchers".

Giraldi also sets Congress in the crosshairs:

Congress has a responsibility to look into Edmonds' allegations. Congressman Henry Waxman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has been stonewalling Edmonds and her supporters, preferring instead to look into steroids use among professional athletes. To be sure, some in the media and Congress are undoubtedly nervous because the Edmond's story involves Israel and corrupt officials both in Washington and Tel Aviv. Many of the American former and current officials involved are considered to be particularly close to the Israeli government and to the Israeli lobby AIPAC. Others fear that FBI investigative reports or wiretaps revealing illegal contributions or bribery of congressmen could open up a can of worms that many would prefer to keep closed.

In other words, Congress is protecting its own--in an attitude no less servile than that of the US media.

Daniel Ellsberg has gone on the record to state that Sibel's story "is far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers". The Washington Post received the Pulitzer Prize for Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein's investigation and reporting of the Watergate scandal. To use Ellsberg's words, Sibel's story "is far more explosive" than Watergate and I have no doubt that a future Pulitzer Prize would be the result of any serious, comprehensive journalistic investigation of Sibel's story of the corruption and international and domestic intrigue surrounding "the theft and sale of United States defense secrets, most particularly nuclear technology".

More from Giraldi on Sibel:


Found in Translation.

Phil Giraldi chats about Sibel Edmonds, including mp3 (Sibel chat starts at 24 minutes into the interview).

Sibel, Giraldi, American Conservative Mag from May 2006.