Supreme Court rejects appeal by fired FBI linguist

[deminks]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051128/pl_nm/court_fbi_linguist_dc;_ylt=AnJL4sxP.y1fA1YiDUKPLKCs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court let stand on Monday the dismissal of a lawsuit by a former FBI linguist who said she had been fired in 2002 for speaking out about possible security breaches, misconduct and incompetent translation work.

Without any comment, the justices rejected an appeal by Sibel Edmonds, who worked as a contract linguist at the FBI's Washington field office from shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks until her dismissal the following March.


U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton dismissed the case after then-Attorney General John Ashcroft invoked the rarely used "state secrets privilege."

He warned that further disclosure of the duties of Edmonds and other translators could cause "serious damage to the national security interests of the United States."

[PDJane]

1. This bunch are simply

protecting their own hides. I am extremely disappointed in the justice system at this point, since Sibel Edwards deserves much better treatment than she has received.

[0007]

11. I'm not shocked, but I'm deeply disappointed in our system and

especially the justice system. This is indeed another sad day in the history of this country.

How much more depression can the people of this country take before all hell breaks loose?

[OKthatsIT]

62. NOW CAN WE HAVE A FILIBUSTER?

What CRAP they've made of our Constitution!

[Stephanie]

2. I guess that's why the facade fell down

The SC is partisan now - no doubt about it.

[samsingh]

more than revealing the identify of a secret agent ?

they clearly use these acts to hide their evil acts.

[lovuian]

3. The Supreme court just put their stamp of traitor on them!!!

they think this is going to stop the truth...

a sad day in America continues more and more!!!

the court system is broken just like the marble on the court house...

[Peggy Day]

6. after 2000, my awe of the SCOTUS went south

I no longer trust them one bit-never will again!

[The Backlash Cometh]

27. What other alternatives do we have left to tell the truth that Sibel knows

The SCOTUS is now part of the conspiracy. There is no other alternative. If the truth comes out now, it will be through civil disobedience and someone, most likely Sibel, will land in a jail where they can do horrible things to her, like they did to Susan McDougal.

[Peace Patriot]

34. Another "turkey shoot" hunting party with Dick?

Inquring minds want to know.

[Usrename]

47. More grounds to impeach the court.

Must take back the House.

Heads on pikes!

[petgoat]

48. Figuratively Speaking, of Course!

Hi there Agent Mike! :hide:

[cascadiance]

50. Justices CAN be impeached by the way...

I'm wondering it that's why they didn't put Gonzales up for nomination, out of concern that he might get impeached later if and when this conspiracy gets exposed, and therefore taking away one of Bush's SC picks.

[warrens]

4. Unbelievable

Like it's even vaguely mysterious what translators do. What a bunch of thugs.

[mmonk]

5. If there were any doubt

that America is no longer a country by the people, for the people, they've been laid to rest.

[fasttense]

7. The Supremes dancing to the right's tune. Maybe they'll have love

fest for brush.

[oregonindy]

8. I think these two are related

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1951802

:)

[ClayZ]

22. I bet it is infested with termites and worms, too!

[cantstandbush]

9. This is why the marble chunk fell this morning. n/t

[0007]

12. Yeah, but was Clinton's fault!

[SharonRB]

16. When I heard about the chunk falling this morning, my thought

was similar to yours. A sign from above that the court isn't doing it's job properly. I hadn't even heard about this ruling yet at that time.

[toopers]

10. What was the vote?

I did not see which justices voted which way. Does anyone have that info?

[randyconspiracybuff]

13. Edmonds, Plame Cases Linked

Has anyone read the recent Antiwar.com articles by Chris Deliso? I did not know this, but Valerie Plame was investigating the same organization as Sibel Edmonds- the American Turkish Council. In fact, Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame met and fell in love while working together at the ATC!

Why isn't the media reporting this? We now have a good idea what Valerie Plame's job at the CIA was- monitoring the nuclear traffic through Pakistan and Turkey.

[babylonsister]

21. Welcome to DU, randy..! Why isn't the media

reporting this? Why, because their handlers told them it's not important, it's old news, blahblahblah ad nauseum. I can only hope this gets woven into Fitz's investigation somehow so Sibel can get some justice.

[ClayZ]

24. Perhaps Fitzgerald will hear her testimony? n/t

[randyconspiracybuff]

29. Unfortunately, the Answer Is No

Fitzgerald is an employee of the Justice Department. The official position of Justice is that Sibel Edmonds testimony is a "State Secret".

[cascadiance]

32. Are you sure about this? I thought Fitzgerald had power to override...

... this if needed. If he can, that might be her only route, though she mentioned that congress could perhaps be pressured into passing a resolution to have a special investigation/hearing. I think she did mention that as an option (which sounds like it might be *the* option now). One more to add to the list of reasons for a grassroots throwing out of existing congress critters for 2006! If Fitzgerald can get her to testify, I'll return to my put off efforts to write a alternate lyrics of "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald" to now read:

"Talk to Sibel Edmonds, Fitzgerald!"

Damn! This really makes me mad. All we needed was four justices to vote to hear her case. Which of the four voted no? (Ginsberg, Breyer, Souter, Stevens). I'd like to know who voted against her!

Here's my site for some t-shirts, bumper stickers, mugs, buttons, etc. for you all to help protest this. I'll get some better and updated stuff out soon. Cafepress.com now has black t-shirts, so I'll be putting some good designs on black t-shirts. Perhaps I'll customize it with a "gag" over Sibel's face.

http://www.cafepress.com/sibel





We can't give up yet!

[Usrename]

49. Think Valerie would have info on 200 nuclear triggers?

Why didn't they plant some WMDs in Iraq? Seems like it was expected that they would do that. I certainly expected it to happen. How about trying to plant nuclear triggers there?

To me, if you wanted to plant nuclear triggers a big concern would be not getting it traced back to yourself. Figure if ya scatter 200 of them buggers around the countryside in little stockpiles that were large enough to be scarey (say five or six in each place) then wait for someone to find them. Iraq's a big country so you need a lot of hiding places to ensure that they get found.



Could this be what happened?

In 'The Stakes Are Too High for Us to Stop Fighting Now' An interview with FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds by Christopher Deliso

“SE: Well, not from my case, but there is quite a lot of public information about such things. A good example was the piece in the L.A. Times –

CD: The black-market nuclear parts one?

SE: Yes, by Josh Meyer. From last year. That article gives a very good example of how such a scheme works.

CD: But that report came out of an official government investigation taking apart the smuggling ring, right?

SE: Yes it did, but that doesn't mean the business was ended.

CD: No?

SE: I think one of the guys involved, Asher Karni, got a short sentence. But the other guy, the big guy, Zeki Bilmen? He got off completely – nothing.”

http://www.antiwar.com/deliso/?articleid=6934


Then, from “Case reveals nuts and bolts of nuclear network” By Josh Meyer Los Angeles Times May 24 2004 ROCKVILLE, Md.

“The components, called triggered spark gaps, are sophisticated electrical switches that have nonmilitary uses, including breaking up kidney stones. But because they emit intense and rapid-fire electrical charges, they are also ideal as nuclear detonators, prompting the U.S. government to restrict their export.

In court documents filed in Karni's case in Washington, authorities say Humayun Khan, in Islamabad, placed an order with Karni for 200 of the switches last summer, at $447 apiece, and that Khan has links to Pakistan's military and a militant Islamic political group."

<snip>

"Karni then contacted Zeki Bilmen, head of Giza Technologies of Secaucus, N.J. On Aug. 6, Giza ordered 200 of the switches from PerkinElmer for $89,400, submitting certificates saying they would be used in a Soweto, South Africa, hospital.

Authorities contacted PerkinElmer officials, who told them a typical hospital order was for five or six switches. In response, the U.S. agents asked them to discreetly disable the first batch of 66 switches and send them on.”

http://quicksitebuilder.cnet.com/supfacts/id474.html

Remember the timeline. If they were doing all this in the summer of 2003 they knew there was no nuclear program in Iraq.

And why did these guys get the 'get out of jail free card'? This is the most curious thing.

Why would anyone procure 200 of these things unless they are going to frame someone?

Any 'legitimate' illicit transaction doesn't make sense. A foreign power with nuclear ambitions wouldn't need delivery of 200 units all at once. Even if it was a single purchase, delivery could be spread over several years (or decades) for a really ambitious WMD program. Terrorists buying 200 units? Yeah, right..

(have posted this several times with no reply - thought I would try again because of your handle.. )

[wakeme2008]

14. troubling they did not list the

votes for this case...

[SharonRB]

15. This is very, very disappointing.

[hootinholler]

17. Has Sibel released a statement?

I haven't seen one yet. This is so disappointing one could even call it reprehensible.

-Hoot

[Beam Me Up]

18. Maybe time for Edmonds to break the law: TESTIFY TO THE PEOPLE SIBEL!

It is time. If need be, leave the country and take refuge elsewhere. Then speak out publicly about what you know.

The Federal government and the Supreme Court of the United States of America IS PROTECTING TRATORS UNDER THE GUISE OF NATIONAL SECURITY.

Impeach the SC. Impeach the entire Bush administration.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

20. Easy for you to say, when it's Edmonds that will go to prison.

[Beam Me Up]

35. Indeed, it is easy for me to say.

And I'm voicing my opinion. She will of course follow the guidance of both her good legal council and her conscience.

[wiggs]

45. silver lining...

Edmonds' case, and what she knows about 9/11, has potential to be bigger than Plame in political impact. It is dynamite stuff (see Sibel discussion in DU groups) not just about FBI mismanagement but also about 9/11, drugs, criminal complicity by US officials, foreign involvement, money laundering, etc..

While her gagging and the courts' complicity in keeping her silent is disturbing, there may be a silver lining in today's SCOTUS decision.

She has tried to do this the correct way -- through the courts -- playing a game in which the deck is stacked against her. It didn't work...but maybe it's for the better If SCOTUS actually had agreed to hear the case, it might have been a long time before there was resolution, and even then the courts and administration would be able to control flow of information, delay court hearings, and redact evidence. Now that the legal approach is dead in the water, perhaps Sibel -- or those who know what Sibel knows -- can feel that the information needs to be made public in any case.

Could someone believe that the information is important enough to release, despite legal exposure? Is there a way to anonymously leak the information?

Many people have seen Sibel's information...Senator Grassley and the 9/11 commissioners are among them. There must be many others. Sibel shouldn't be alone....they should all band together and make an announcement as a group regarding 9/11...make a stand for transparent government and for democracy.

[Beam Me Up]

52. Thank you. This was precisely what I was aiming at. Said by someone more

knowledgeable about such matters than am I. (Just a lowly artist here, no nothing about the legalities.) Still, if there is any way we can stand with Sibel, count me in.

[robertpaulsen]

56. My feelings exactly. What Ellsburg did for Vietnam, she could do for WOT.

I believe she needs to do this before they eliminate her.

[progressoid]

19. "Without any comment..." Hmmm?

[katty]

23. SCOTUS-People of the Lie, 'protecting' U.S. from the ugly truth

[cyberpj]

25. This little bit is from the ACLU site (they got behind her on this) -

History has shown that the government has relied on the state secrets privilege to cover up its own negligence. In the 1953 Supreme Court case that was the basis for today's state secrets privilege doctrine, United States v. Reynolds , the government claimed that disclosing a military flight accident report would jeopardize secret military equipment and harm national security. Nearly 50 years later, in 2004, the truth came out - the accident report contained no state secrets, but instead confirmed that the cause of the crash was faulty maintenance of the B-29 fleet.

The government is engaged in a similar cover-up in the Edmonds case. In 2002, at the request of Senate Judiciary Committee members Charles Grassley (R-IA) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the FBI provided several unclassified briefings to Members of Congress in which it confirmed many of Edmonds' allegations.

More than two years later, the Justice Department retroactively classified those briefings, which were reported in the Congressional Record, and asked Members who had the information posted on their web sites to remove certain documents. This move was a blatant attempt to bolster the government's efforts to dismiss Edmonds' case on state secrets grounds. After the Project On Government Oversight filed a separate lawsuit challenging the retroactive classification, the Justice Department agreed the information could be distributed.

An unclassified summary of a report by the DOJ's Inspector General, released in January 2005, corroborates Edmonds' allegations . The IG report concludes that the FBI had retaliated against Edmonds for reporting serious security breaches, stating that “many of her allegations were supported, that the FBI did not take them seriously enough, and that her allegations were, in fact, the most significant factor in the FBI's decision to terminate her services.”

Edmonds' case is not an isolated incident. The federal government is routinely retaliating against government employees who uncover weaknesses in our ability to prevent terrorist attacks or protect public safety.

http://www.aclu.org/scotus/2005/19950prs20050926.html?ht=

[cyberpj]

26. Re: H.R. 1317, Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act

ACLU Letter to the House of Representatives Urging Swift Passage of H.R. 1317, Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act (10/18/2005)


Re: H.R. 1317, Federal Employee Protection of Disclosures Act

Dear Representative:

On behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union and its nearly 500,000 members, we urge swift action to pass H.R. 1317, which corrects critical shortcomings in whistleblower protections for federal employees. We urge you to contact House leaders to ask for a vote on H.R. 1317 at the earliest opportunity, and to permit amendments to H.R. 1317 that will strengthen it further by expanding it to cover national security whistleblowers and government contractors.

Whistleblowers provide an essential function in correcting government misconduct, including violations of civil liberties. In addition, whistleblowers have been critical in calling attention to security failures, putting pressure on government to address real security deficiencies rather than advocating limits to fundamental freedoms.

Whistleblowers often suffer retaliation at the hands of agencies who find their disclosures embarrassing, which is why Congress passed the Whistleblower Protection Acts of 1989 and 1994. Unfortunately, the main appeals court with jurisdiction over whistleblower cases, has severely weakened the law in a series of decisions that misread the law in a way that is actively hostile to congressional intent to protect whistleblowers.

H.R. 1317 would clarify congressional intent to provide:

http://www.aclu.org/natsec/gen/21152leg20051018.html?ht=

[cyberpj]

28. Oct 24, 05 article :

October 24, 2005
Whistleblower Has Elite Interests Running Scared
by Christian Nicholson
(Christian Nicholson is a freelance writer based in Paris.)

snip...
Setting aside the gross injustice of it all, why would Ashcroft bother gagging a contract linguist with no more than six months under her belt? Why would he go so far as to forbid her from naming the languages she speaks, or ban all mention of her place of birth? Citing "sensitive diplomatic relations" and their importance to America's national security, the Justice Department preferred the shameful embarrassment of muzzling a witness in the 9/11 case to the outright scandal that would likely erupt were Edmonds' story known.

Some of Edmonds' story, however, can be reconstructed from the public record, which includes interviews she gave prior to the slew of gag orders, as well as an inspector general's report, the declassified version of which was released in January 2005, largely corroborating Edmonds' charges and pointing out that the FBI botched the subsequent investigation. This, of course, is why whistleblowers are fired: they make incompetent people look bad. But is it enough to get whistleblowers gagged?

more...
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/nicholson.php?articleid=7738

[Peace Patriot]

30. Nicholson lays out part of why Edmonds' testimony is so important--not

the whole story, according to Edmonds, but just PART of it, and not the most important part at that, as follows (pieced together from various pre-gag bits):


"In the Edmonds case, it's not just 'sensitive foreign relations' that are on the line, it's the Americans who are doing the sensitive relating. Indeed, a glance at the bigwigs involved in the American-Turkish Council reveals a panoply of hawks, former ambassadors and generals, and numerous lights of the three Bush administrations: the ATC Board of Directors chair is Brent Scowcroft, erstwhile national security adviser to Bush père; Dick Cheney himself is a former member, and many of his former colleagues at Halliburton remain on board, as do higher-ups at Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Sikorsky, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, and Eli Lilly.

"David Rose of Vanity Fair, on the authority of congressional staffers who were present for Edmonds' classified testimony before Senators Grassley and Leahy of the Senate Judicial Committee, relates how ATC employees allegedly spoke of senior politicians maintaining covert relations with – and benefiting from the clandestine financial support of – the ATC. One of the notables that purportedly figured in Edmonds' testimony was House Speaker Dennis Hastert <.pdf>. Edmonds has also supposedly testified about a State Department staffer and a Pentagon official trafficking in information – that is, exchanging secrets for money."

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/nicholson.php?articleid=7738
---------

Edmonds' full story, should it ever get free of the Bushites' gag orders, apparently involves intelligence in the leadup to 9/11.

---------

"Edmonds herself claims, inasmuch as she can claim anything at all on camera, that events hidden from the American public are much bigger than the simple case of an upright translator done wrong, and bigger even than highly placed elected officials taking bribes. She evokes widespread criminal activity involving nationals from several countries, linked by transnational criminal networks and engaged in clandestine contraband of all sorts – including drugs, weapons, and sensitive information. Some of that criminal activity, she claims, is relevant to the events leading up to 9/11."

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/nicholson.php?articleid=7738

---------

Re: the Plame case, and Plame's investigation of the American Turkish Council (mentioned in a post above)...

I've also wondered myself--re: the WMD-planting theory of Traitorgate--if Turkey might be the border (with Iraq) that Bush junta operatives would choose for moving nukes, or nuke materials or components, into Iraq to be "found" by Judith Miller. The Turkish border would provide the safe cushion of Kurdish tribes for conveyance and secrecy, as well as an ally country from which to launch the operation.

Of the two Islamic country news reports on a botched effort by the US to plant WMDs in Iraq (March '03), one of them involved the Basra port, and the other did not provide a location in Iraq, as I recall. The latter was a report by a Pentagon debriefer named Nelda Rogers who had heard tell of a CIA operation that went bad--a convoy carrying covert WMDs that "met with friendly fire." A covert ground operation would fit with the Turkish border.

But Turkey turned hostile about the Iraq invasion, and denied the US the "northern front" that they had wanted to use. Perhaps that's why the covert WMD shipment ended up in Basra (unloaded under false Red Cross labels--according to an Iraq Governing Council member, who was quoted in the article.)

It seems likely that something extremely serious and very bad for the Bush Cartel is being covered up by denying Edmonds her day in court. She may not even know what it is. (In the statements I've read of hers, she seems very puzzled by the Bush regime's lack of interest in the huge security breeches that she was trying to reveal to them--and that she got fired for trying to do.)

"State secrets," my ass.

[lovuian]

31. Canada should grant her asylum and then she could tell the

World the truth!!!

[cascadiance]

33. It's not just Sibel Edmonds that suffers from this ruling...

About 8 or more other cases recently have been silenced by the States Secret gag rule. They're also having the doors slammed in their faces too!

Democracy just had another hammer pounded into the stake closer to its heart today! Damn I thought it was going to be a good day with Cunningham resigning here in California!

[Al-CIAda]

36. Sibel knows 9/11 was an inside job. - n/t

[Mr_Spock]

37. It's time for her to let the cat out of the bag...

as promised...

[brentspeak]

38. That's easy for you to say

You're not the one who might face criminal charges.

[Mr_Spock]

53. She said she was going to do it...

So, I'm not "saying" it as if it were MY idea, she claimed she would do such. DO you have a problem with that?

[Oilwellian]

39. National Whistleblowers Association

A group of whistleblowers is threatening to blow more whistles if Congress does not soon strengthen protections against retaliation.

Sibel Edmonds, a former contract translator for the FBI, said in an April 28 press conference with the National Security Whistleblower Coalition that whistleblower protections are riddled with loopholes and do nothing to deter retaliation.

Edmonds said that if Congress does not act in two to three months to toughen those protections — by criminalizing whistleblower retaliation and allowing whistleblowers to sue retaliators and agencies that do not provide enough protection — the coalition will publicly name officials who have been found by inspectors general or Congress to have acted illegally or unethically, yet remain in their jobs or were promoted.

“They’re allowing wrongdoers to hide behind the walls of these agencies,” Edmonds said. “This has to change. If they don’t start fixing this broken system, we will.”

The 54-person coalition, made up of federal employees who have warned superiors, lawmakers and the public about wrongdoing at their agencies, was formed last summer. It counts among its members former FBI agent Coleen Rowley, who gained fame after detailing management obstructions that hindered an investigation of a Sept. 11, 2001, conspirator before the attacks; former U.S. Park Police Chief Teresa Chambers; and Daniel Ellsberg, the former Rand Corp. analyst who in 1971 leaked to the press the so-called “Pentagon papers.”

http://justacitizen.com/articles_documents/Federal%20Times%20-%205-02-2005.htm

Let's hope they keep this promise.

[cyberpj]

40. I looked up the legislation but can't quite figure out what's going on

with it.

Do you know?

[Oilwellian]

55. Here's another article on the issue

Sorry I'm so late in responding...

Lawmakers didn’t go as far as some advocates wanted, however. The Republican-led committee struck down an amendment by two Democrats that would have extended whistleblower protections to employees at intelligence agencies and the FBI, who are not covered under current law.

“If a whistleblower has information on our national security, we need to do everything we can to have them come forward,” said Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., who offered the amendment with Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif. “The way it is now . . . we’re basically telling them to shut up, go away and be quiet.”

Committee Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., said he didn’t know enough about the issue to vote on extending coverage to national security employees and felt that doing so could prompt objections by the White House that would make it harder to pass the larger bill.

That drew an irate response from the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, whose members include dozens of current and former civil service and contract employees who lost their jobs or were otherwise retaliated against for making whistleblower allegations.

Coalition president Sibel Edmonds, who was fired from her job as an FBI language specialist in March 2002 after reporting security breaches and other violations to her bosses, said Davis rejected the coalition’s repeated requests for a hearing to explain why national security employees need full whistleblower protections.

“The message they are sending to these national security whistleblowers is, ‘We don’t want to hear from you,’” Edmonds said in an interview.

http://federaltimes.com/index2.php?S=1146772

[cyberpj]

60. Thanks.

Remark response times are never an issue - we're all checking in and out of DU as we can during the day and I'm just happy to get more info.

Sibel is doing such good work. I was overjoyed when the ACLU joined the cause. I can't say I'm surprised at the Supremes but I'm still damned disappointed. Again.

[loudsue]

41. I want to know how each justice voted....

This burns me up!

Has anyone sent this information over to Arianna Huffington? She needs to blow this sky-high on her blog.

:kick::kick::kick:

[slackmaster]

42. SC rejecting a case without comment means exactly that

Far more cases get filed than the SC can actually handle. People should avoid the temptation to interpret the SC not taking a case as any kind of statement as to the merits of that case. As long as they haven't rejected it with prejudice it can be filed again.

The Justices’ Caseload

The Court’s caseload has increased steadily to a current total of more than 7,000 cases
on the docket per Term. The increase has been rapid in recent years. In 1960, only 2,313
cases were on the docket, and in 1945, only 1,460. Plenary review, with oral arguments by
attorneys, is granted in about 100 cases per Term. Formal written opinions are delivered in
80–90 cases. Approximately 50–60 additional cases are disposed of without granting
plenary review. The publication of a Term’s written opinions, including concurring opinions,
dissenting opinions, and orders, approaches 5,000 pages. Some opinions are revised a
dozen or more times before they are announced.

(The foregoing was taken from a booklet prepared by the Supreme Court of the United States,
and published with funding from the Supreme Court Historical Society.)



http://www.supremecourtus.gov/about/justicecaseload.pdf

[cascadiance]

43. Who's responsible for the ordering of how cases are being heard?

Roberts? I'm sure he'd take advantage of this "heavy case load" and put it at the bottom. I'm sure he and the Bushies would like to have it heard later when O'Connor is replaced with a new justice, Scalito, or whoever gets selected to replace him.

If this is the case, did the court justices even have a *chance* to vote on whether to hear it? Or was it just held back by Roberts until they'd "heard all cases they could for this term". If so, that's how important it was to have kept off Roberts off this bench. Had we fillibustered him until now, perhaps a Stevens-lead court would have gotten to it earlier. Certainly with the ACLU featuring Edmonds and her lawyer from the ACLU speaking at their "preview" of court cases this coming year for the Supreme Court on CSPAN a while back, it wasn't due to the court feeling that this case was "less important" (at least in a legitimately "less important" sense). The ACLU seemed to hold it up right there with some of those abortion appeals cases in importance.

[slackmaster]

44. Interesting question, maybe a legal eagle can answer it

It appears the SC sets its own rules on how cases are screened.

[cascadiance]

46. I heard a case can be heard one of two ways...

Either the Chief Justice personally says he wants to hear it, or four justices all vote to hear it. However, I hadn't considered that the latter might be kept from being an option if the case is kept from being considered within a certain time frame (if there are a lot of cases on the docket) through control of the flow of cases by the CJ.

Might also be interesting to study how many cases were filed by Rethugs seeking to fill the docket so much that this would have to happen and the court justices would be prevented from hearing this case through the manipulative mechanics of newly and strategically placed Roberts, along with perhaps a lot of folks giving them "busy work"!

I'm still :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

I really hope to find out if in fact the justices were even "allowed" to vote on this. If not, that's another sign that our system of government is getting destroyed by this criminals!

[MADem]

64. This is really a "40 Foot Pole" non-decision

As in "I wouldn't touch that with a...!"

They endeavor to stay above politics (well, except for that disastrous foray in 00--perhaps they've learned something from that mess) and this is their way of saying "Leave us OUT OF IT!!!"

For NOW, anyway....

[cascadiance]

51. God is mad at the court too!

A part of the marble above the court near "Liberty" just crumbled and fell off this morning too. God is COMMANDING them to change their ways and reconsider Sibel's case!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1951802&mesg_id=1951802

[NVMojo]

54. Corrupt!!!!

[kma3346]

57. This really irks me

They'll hear Anna Nicole Smith but not Sibel Edmonds? That is truly outrageous.

:wtf:

[nicknameless]

58. Over 50% of today's seated federal judges were appointed by dumbya!

This statistic was mentioned on Thom Hartmann's show last week.
During Clinton's two terms, the repug Congress refused to have hearings for his nominees.
Since dumbya's coronation, all of those vacancies have been getting filled with extremist wing-nuts.

The Supreme Injustices are just a snapshot of what's happening across the country.

[cascadiance]

59. She's gotta go to the congress now...

This is where WE can help!

As quoted in the above article:

"This case was never about me; it was about the FBI's attempt to cover up wrongdoing and mismanagement," Edmonds said in a statement issued after the high court rejected her appeal.

"I am disheartened that the legal system has failed to hold the FBI accountable for its actions, but I will continue to press Congress to fully investigate security breaches within the Bureau," she said.

This is an area where WE can help her, since congress critters are accountable to us where the SCOTUS isn't! It's up for us to get everyone we can to call our congress critters and just "assault" them noting that we're "single-issue voters, and hearing the truth from Sibel IS our issue on how we'll vote in 2006". If they vote against hearing her, that WILL mean we vote for someone else!

I'm going to try and meet with Francine Busby to try and help her become the "new kid on the block" who's presumably clean of all of this corruption, to take up Sibel's cause, if and when we can get her elected for Cunningham's seat!

Perhaps we can have a single day call-in marathon where we can all call our congress critters on this issue, and get a petition, etc. too.

[randyconspiracybuff]

63. Plame and Edmonds

I did not realize before that Sibel's case was linked to the Fitzgerald investigation then- BINGO- I read part of Joseph Wilson's book, the "Politics of Truth". It is clear from the book that Plame was spying on the American Turkish Council- the same organization that Edmonds has fingered.

Unfortunately, how many Americans remember who Sibel Edmonds is? We are fighting an uphill battle. Even when I post on mainstream liberal blogs about the Edmonds case and show how it connects to the Plame case, no one seems interested.

How do we break through?

I don't live in California, but a friend of mine is Rep. Diane Watson's Chief of Staff. Maybe I'll give him a call.

[cascadiance]

65. Sibel has said in interviews that these cases are all linked...

... with the same faces popping up in all of them, and she fingered the state department where this was all centered and most of it was happening. She of course isn't being specific and trying to throw out hints for the rest of us to put together to avoid jailtime.

I'll say again that I think now is the time we need to call up our congresspeople, have them look at the various court decisions to see how the judicial system has failed us to help get the truth out, and how it is now up to the legislative branch to pick up the pieces on fixing what sounds like may be some terrible crimes being committed behind our backs.

I'll have a new black t-shirt out soon on my cafepress site which will say something like:

Single Issue Voter Here!
I'm Voting For TRUTH!

(pic of Sibel Edmonds with a gag photoshopped over her mouth with "States Secret" printed on top of it)

(maybe a statue of liberty opposite her with a blindfold and earmuffs too to represent us Americans that are being muzzled too)

Congress, Free Sibel Edmonds NOW!
The Truth will Set us All Free
http://www.justacitizen.com/

I'm considering other suggestions to make it better/augment it too!

[randyconspiracybuff]

69. I Agree It's Worth A Try To Call Our Congresspeople But

I honestly think we are fighting an uphill battle with Congress, because they have been told by the Justice Department to shut up and not discuss anything that has to do with Sibel's case. The only thing to counterbalance this effort by Justice is to build public awareness. Right now, most liberals don't pay any attention to Sibel Edmonds. Until we can get our fellow progressives to take up the cause, I don't think Congress will feel pressured to investigate her charges.

That's why I think the link with the CIA leak investigation could be important. Bloggers on the Left have been very interested in that case. If we can make them understand that through Sibel Edmonds we can get a better understanding of Valerie Plame's job at the CIA, then maybe we can get enough people to phone their Congressperson and demand investigations.

What do you think?

I think your idea for a t-shirt is good, but I'd also like to see one of Sibel next to Valerie Plame with the phrase, "The American Turkish Council's Worse Nightmares"

[cascadiance]

70. Your points are well taken...

It is an uphill battle, but one that I'm convinced needs to be fought. I think that is why Sibel is being squelched so much by both sides. I think her information hits to the core of this whole conspiracy, which is why it so important that we can raise public awareness. How we can get people in sufficient numbers to believe that there is an issue for them to be concerned about is the challenge.

Thanks for your suggestions on the t-shirt... I'd like to get more. Still haven't had time to get a new design together yet, but hope to by the end of this week.

On your idea, I'd be a little concerned that most people won't recognize even a picture of Valerie Plame (though I'm sure they'd know her name). And I don't think they'd know the American Turkish Council's role in this. As a person myself who's lived in Turkey as a kid when my Dad worked for USAID, and even with some of Sibel Edmonds' comments recently, I think we need to be careful to not just label Turkish organizations themselves as the culprits. I know there are a lot of good people in the Turkish government, just like we have a lot of good people in our government trying to fight the good fight. Note that the World Tribunal on Iraq was held in Istanbul. But there are those criminal elements in both governments too, which is where we need to point the fingers at. In both governments, they have enough power to escape accountability, and that needs to be changed through our efforts (since the judicial branch doesn't appear to have the courage or enough interest to do so).

Sibel herself has recently said (after the Vanity Fair interview) that she loves her old country and its' people, and that her efforts aren't "anti-Turkish", which I think was what some have made them out to be to make it sound like her being part of some "Armenian conspiracy" (from the Turks' perspective) or the like with the Dennis Hastert issues, and sidetracking (intentionally or no) us from the outside from seeing the real purpose of trying to expose a criminal conspiracy in both governments (and probably in Israel's too, with the AIPAC stuff that appears to be linked to). She even said to me in a private phone call I had with her some months ago before the Vanity Fair article came out that Turks probably hate her, and sounded a little saddened when she said that.

I don't want to say that the Armenian cause isn't important, but to me, that is a separate issue that should be dealt with separately. Note that the same Aremenians that were demanding along with us that Hastert be investigated, are in many cases being made to "feel better", by the congress bringing up the Armenian question again recently, which they did, which does nothing to deal with his bribery issues, and attacking the criminal conspiracy we are looking to try to expose and bring down. Armenians, though they migh thave coincident goals here and there, do have different ultimate goals (recognizing genocide) than we do on bringing down this multinational conspiracy.

I want the T-shirt's message to be something that will grab the average person on the street's attention, with something that they will be compelled to seek out and get more information on. It therefore needs to have some pieces that are recognizable and emotional for the growin disenchanted of Bush's regime, and pointers (like www.justacitzen.com link) to where they can get more information. If anyone has other ideas on how we can get other "very brief" phrases, words, etc. in the message on this t-shirt to get more attention, please speak up though.

It should also communicate a useful action the average person can take, which now I think is to try and appeal to their congress representatives to demand some action be taken and that there will be a cost to them if they don't ( like my "one issue voter" phrase at the top).

[whyzayker]

61. NYT - Justices Reject F.B.I. Translator's (Edmonds) Appeal on Termination

WASHINGTON, Nov. 28 - The Supreme Court refused on Monday to hear an appeal by a former F.B.I. translator of Middle Eastern languages who asserted that she was terminated for trying to expose ineptitude and espionage within the bureau's translation section.

Two lower federal courts dismissed the plaintiff's lawsuit for retaliatory termination, accepting the federal government's argument that the case could not proceed without revealing state secrets. Under the so-called state secrets privilege, recognized by the Supreme Court 50 years ago, a lawsuit must be dismissed when there is no alternative to protect national security.

In her appeal, the translator, Sibel Edmonds, who was represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, argued that the lower courts misapplied the privilege in dismissing her lawsuit before discovery and without making a sufficient effort to consider evidence that was not privileged.

******

Earlier this year, a report by the Justice Department's inspector general found that evidence supported many of Ms. Edmonds's accusations, that the bureau failed to take them seriously enough and that her accusations were "the most significant factor in the F.B.I.'s decision to terminate her services" in 2002. The report reached no conclusion on whether espionage had taken place.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/29/politics/29scotus.html?pagewanted=print

[cascadiance]

66. Supreme Court Denies Review in FBI Whistleblower Case (ACLU.org)

Here's ACLU's summary of yesterday's decision against her by the Supreme Court, with comments from her lawyer, etc.

http://www.aclu.org/natsec/gen/21831prs20051128.html

Supreme Court Denies Review in FBI Whistleblower Case (11/28/2005)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: [e-mail]

NEW YORK -- The American Civil Liberties Union today expressed disappointment over the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision not to review the case of Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator who was fired in retaliation for reporting serious security breaches and espionage within the Bureau. Lower courts dismissed the case when former Attorney General John Ashcroft invoked the rarely used “state secrets” privilege.

“Sibel Edmonds is a true patriot who deserved her day in court,” said ACLU Associate Legal Director Ann Beeson. “We are disappointed that the Supreme Court did not see the ongoing danger of allowing the FBI to hide its blunders behind the ‘states secrets’ privilege.”

Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office, added, "Now it is up to Congress to pass legislation that would prevent retaliation against heroic government employees who uncover weaknesses in our ability to protect public safety."

The Court created the so-called state secrets privilege more than 50 years ago but has not considered it since. However, the ACLU said the government is increasingly misusing the privilege to cover up its own wrongdoing and to keep legitimate cases out of court.

...

Also, the Village Voice has another piece on her case too today, that just came out a few minutes ago, that's a good summary of it:

http://villagevoice.com/news/0548,ridgeway,70491,2.html

Mondo Washington
What's the Deal With Sibel Edmonds?
Feds, Supreme Court silence an FBI translator who knew too much
by James Ridgeway
November 29th, 2005 3:37 PM



WASHINGTON, D.C.--The latest rebuke to Sibel Edmonds, the former FBI translator who has been trying unsuccessfully to make public what she knows about the FBI�s 9-11-related operations, comes from the Supreme Court.

It has declined to hear her court case, thereby letting stand decisions of the lower courts that enforce a silence imposed upon her by the federal government.

The ACLU represented Edmonds. Sibel Edmonds is a true patriot who deserved her day in court," said ACLU Associate Legal Director Ann Beeson, in an official statement. "We are disappointed that the Supreme Court did not see the ongoing danger of allowing the FBI to hide its blunders behind the 'states secrets' privilege."

Even though its own inspector general has found much of what Edmonds has to say to be correct, the Justice Department--first under Attorney General Ashcroft and now under Attorney General Gonzalez--have invoked the arcane States Secrets law to shut her up. The department simply declared everything in her case secret, in the interest of national security.

...

http://www.cafepress.com/sibel

[Benhurst]

67. What's the secret? Everyone knows the criminals put in office

by a corrupt U.S. Supreme Court head an inept, corrupt, neofascist regime. Why not let her talk?

[Sven77]

68. has the ACLU won anything lately ?

it seems like the ACLU is just losing cases to set bad precident.