Back to Business: Updates


A Few New Developments in The Makings of a Police State

What happened to the month of September?! For me, it just flew by: The Krikorian Case, the American Conservative Magazine article, the latest from former FBI CI Specialist John Cole, several interesting interviews for our upcoming Boiling Frogs Show, building and designing my soon-to-be-launched website…and of course full-time motherhood and my part time job. Well, I am still standing!

I am expecting to have the new site up and running by mid October. Since ‘blogger’ doesn’t have a forwarding function I’ll post the notice for the new site as my last post to direct our readers to the site. It’s not going to be just a new site but the beginning of a new exciting project. Once the move is completed and we are settled, I’ll announce the names of my investigative journalist partners whom you all will recognize, together with a few other projects and objectives.

I’ve been running behind in publishing my next series of Boiling Frogs Interviews. In the next few weeks I’ll post interviews with John Cole (Former FBI CI Specialist), Melvin Goodman (Former CIA Analyst), Richard Barlow (Former CIA Analyst), and Steve Kohn (Attorney & the Founder of National Whistleblowers Center).

Speaking of interviews, here is the transcript of a great interview by Scott Horton with Philip Giraldi and Joe Lauria based on the American Conservative Magazine cover story.

Here is some semi-recent news and developments related to our ‘Police State’ topics I’ve been meaning to post, but for one reason or another were unable to actually sit down and do:

President of words but not actions

Those of you who’ve been following the latest on the President’s half-hearted promises on the future of the State Secrets Privilege may want to check out his latest action in ‘action’ and ‘implementation.’ The informed civil libertarians have been cautioning against celebrating our Attorney General’s vague announcement of improvements in using and implementing this privilege. They are right. The changes are in words only and cosmetic at best. As we all know the new administration has been defending, justifying and actually promoting the former administration’s abuses of this unconstitutional privilege. Here is the latest case:


The government’s assertion of the state secrets privilege in a pending lawsuit brought by a former Drug Enforcement Administration agent will not be affected by the new Attorney General policy limiting the use of the privilege, the Justice Department said last week, because it is already in compliance with the new policy.

In a September 24 appellate brief (pdf) in the case of Horn v. Huddle, Justice Department attorneys urged an appeals court to overturn a lower court ruling that would authorize the parties in the lawsuit to disclose classified information to their attorneys. The Department also defended its use of the state secrets privilege.

An August 26 ruling in the case held that the parties’ counsel had a “need to know” the classified information possessed by their clients, and the court therefore directed the government to authorize the sharing of that information.

The government immediately objected. “The district court’s extraordinary order — compelling the government to grant security clearances and to authorize disclosure of classified national security information to private counsel… — unnecessarily usurps the Executive Branch’s authority and responsibility to protect from disclosure classified national security information as to which the state secrets privilege has been invoked,” the government argued in its September 24 brief.

The government also declared that the Attorney General’s new policy limiting the use of the state secrets privilege, which takes effect on October 1, would have no impact on the present case.

“The assertion of the privilege in this case satisfies the standards in the new policy concerning the applicable legal standards, narrow tailoring, and limitations on the assertion of the privilege. Moreover, the privilege as invoked in this case has been carefully reviewed by senior Department of Justice officials, who have determined that invocation of the privilege in this litigation is warranted,” the government brief stated.

That’s right. This, in addition to the rest (NSA & CIA extraordinary rendition cases). Make sure you cite these cases (among many others, including the mounting civilian casualties in Afghanistan) next time you hear one of those ‘Obama Apologists’ rant on about the greatness of this president …

President Fights to Keep the Worst PATRIOT ACT Provisions Extended & Alive

Our ‘President of Change’ has done another flip on one of his many campaign promises. Now Mr. Obama is vehemently seeking to have Congress extend all three expiring provisions of the so very unpatriotic and un-American PATRIOT ACT.

This is from a report released on Monday, September 15:

“Despite promises during the campaign that he would review certain of the most intrusive portions of the PATRIOT Act, President Barack Obama’s Justice Department today is calling for Congress to extend all three expiring provisions, though they were “willing to consider” civil rights protections “as long as they don’t weaken” the president’s powers under the act”

Among those provisions the administration is seeking to extend is the infamous Section 215: the provision which allows law enforcement access to library and bookstore records, without probable cause, for “national security” reasons. The American Library Association has been complaining for years that the provision was overbroad and many fear it could prove to have a chilling effect on the ability to read potentially subversive literature.

Another of the provisions the administration wants extended is the so-called “lone wolf” provision, which amends the FISA definition of “agent of a foreign power” to include people the government can’t establish as having any link to a foreign government or terrorist organization.”

You can read the rest of this article and supporting links here.

I know my readers are too sophisticated and informed to need any explanation of these unconstitutional provisions, so I won’t provide any. Come on, even the least informed citizen of this country should shudder after reading the ‘lone wolf’ provision. It says it plain and simple: the government doesn’t need ANY cause WHATSOEVER to target a citizen whenever and wherever it chooses to go after him/her. Period.

Let’s go ahead and add this to the long list of President Obama’s ‘changes on change.’ If you haven’t read my piece on this topic, Two Sides of the Same Coin, here is the link:

I am afraid at this rate soon we may deservedly call our new president ‘Bush Dark.’ Let’s hope I am wrong…

Girl Scouts: From Cookies to Guns?

Part I of my Police State Series was on ‘The National Security Generation’. As a reminder here are a few excerpts from that piece:

On May 15 this year Telegraph UK ran an article on a nationwide Boy Scouts training program on combating terrorism. The reported number of scouts between the ages of 14 and 21 who are currently enrolled in law enforcement and terrorism programs across the United States is around 35,000.


“Dressed in combat fatigues and armed with air guns firing tiny plastic pellets, they are taught how to assault buses, raid marijuana fields and rescue terrorist hostages from buildings.”

LA Times reports on Meade High School in Northern Maryland, the first high school in the country to offer a four-year course in Domestic Security. The article’s ‘sexy’ title goes like this: ‘The School Mixes Algebra, Homeland Security.’ The goal is identified as ‘to help graduates build careers in one of America’s few growth industries.’ By the ‘few growth industries’ they mean not only the intelligence agencies, Department of Homeland Security, etc, but all the parasitic related private contractors such as private weapons companies and mercenary contractor firms like well-known Blackwater.


“the 90 ninth-graders who chose the new homeland security program this last school year focused on topics torn from the headlines: Islamic jihadism, nuclear arms, cyber-crime, domestic militias and the like.”

Mother Jones reports further on Joppatowne High School:

“Dedicated to everything from architecture to sports medicine, “career academies” claim to offer high school kids focus, relevancy, and solid job prospects. Now add a new kind of program to the list: homeland security high. In late August, Maryland’s Joppatowne High School became the first school in the country dedicated to churning out would-be Jack Bauers. The 75 students in the Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness magnet program will study cybersecurity and geospatial intelligence, respond to mock terror attacks, and receive limited security clearances at the nearby Army chemical warfare lab.”

Here is more in another article covering the same topic on Chicago schools:

“One in 10 public high school students in Chicago wears a military uniform to school and takes classes — including how to shoot a gun properly — from retired veterans.
That number is expected to rise as junior military reserve programs expand across the country now that a congressional cap of 3,500 units has been lifted from the nearly century-old scheme.”

Now the Department of Homeland Security has decided to expand their ‘Homeland Security Youth’ doctrinarian program. Their new target: Girl Scouts. They appear intent on replacing our little girl scouts’ cookies with guns and their old line community work with snitching and militancy:

“The United States wants to enlist its 3.4 million Girl Scouts in the effort to combat hurricanes, pandemics, terror attacks and other disasters.”

“The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) launched a campaign Tuesday to entice the blue, brown and green-clad multitudes to be even more prepared, with the promise of a new patch if they pitch in.”

I tried to find some pictures of our soon to be transformed Scouts, but couldn’t find any. So I decided that these old pictures from the last century would work just as well:

The Homeland’s objective one: start them really young.


The Homeland’s Objective Two:
Train and militarize for Homeland Security.


The Homeland’s Objective Three: Don’t forget the
little girls.

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.

Comments

  1. avatar Sibel Edmonds says:

    Peter B Collins Interviews John Cole:

    To listen to the interview visit Peter B. Collins' Site: http://www.peterbcollins.com/podcast-45/

  2. avatar William Ney says:

    1. No mention here of the Newsmax business (Military Coup required to Solve Obama Problem) …

    http://newcombat.net/Conversation/2009/10/02/newsmax-obama-coup/

    Do you dismiss it as impotent lunatic fringe unworthy of notice?

    Beer Hall Putsch was lunatic fringe …

    2. I don't dismiss it — mostly because a large handful of respected generals came out of retirement in September, under the Human Rights First umbrella, to take on Cheney (as if he still exists) and what I sense is a growing posse of grumblers within their own brassy acquaintance.

    http://newcombat.net/Conversation/2009/10/01/generals-vs-tcheneys/

    Gen Charles Krulak, in particular, with his pedigree …

    Something is afoot, substantial enough to arouse these patriotic generals.

    Or — what do you think?

  3. avatar Anonymous says:
  4. Speaking of Obama's continuing use of Bush's dictatorial powers, I haven't yet gone through all the docs to figure out exactly what this means but this extension of the national emergency declared after 911 seems relevant.

  5. avatar Anonymous says:

    Compassionate Conservatism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj4I2f0ZO6g

  6. avatar Anonymous says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_center#See_also These are the new Fusion Centers around the Country protecting US and our way of life. All of these centers are for US and should be viewed by all and we should all feel safe and secure as we view them protecting each and every one of US. God bless them and God bless America. Shalom, Jaye

  7. avatar Anonymous says:

    Bush Dark? You said it. How about
    The Reneger.

  8. avatar Anonymous says:

    Sibel, forgive me for being a little off topic but this may be important. http://en.rian.ru/business/20091003/156332949.html

  9. avatar Rob Clark says:

    @ Metem: The declaration of national emergency is nothing new, only the purpose changes. It has been an annual tradition by every sitting president since the end of WW2. No sitting president has EVER surrendered power and authority exercised by their predecessor, and we have been effectively ruled by executive decree this entire time.
    Has he used an unconstitutional signing statement yet?

  10. avatar Anonymous says:

    This over at: http://solari.com/blog/?p=4531#more-4531

    The Southern people have traditionally been strong supporters of the rule of law, properly founded upon impartial justice. Instructed by our history, culture, and religion, we grasp the nature of human evil and understand that threats to the commonwealth exist. They must be restrained, sometimes by force. This is the principal role of civil government, from which it derives its legitimacy under God and in covenant with the People. However, the Southern tradition does not embrace order at the expense of liberty. When government becomes lawless and despotic, it forfeits its legitimacy, and thereby the allegiance and obedience of its citizens.

    We note with alarm the preparations by Federal authorities for massive unconstitutional acts in the event of a national emergency, which the Government itself may declare at will. Such acts may include unleashing the Armed Forces on the population in violation in posse comitatus and habeas corpus, and mass arrests of citizens for dissident speech, public assembly, or political associations, even though these are fully protected by the State and Federal Constitutions.

    Simon

  11. avatar Anonymous says:

    @William Ney, A military Coup with no draft in place, is you smoking crack? If we have another War (Like Iran) Civil Air Patrol and Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts will be on the front line. Are you gonna draft Beavis and Butthead with their super ADD? Do you know what Dents Heads, Burn Outs, Drug and Alcohol addicts, PTSDs, Gang members, Racists and Psychos and of course a lot of good honest, hardworking, humane Soldiers, Sailors, Airman and Marines are? Answer; today's military. A Military Coup that's really funny.

  12. avatar Anonymous says:

    @William Ney, And I would go as far as to say IMHO our military could well protect our leaders because the Secret Service are a bunch of incompetent, politically motivated, racist, screw ups although completely compliant with Affirmative Action rules and look macho and sexy in their shades, suits and earpieces. Sincerely, ShaJ

  13. avatar William Ney says:

    Anonymouse,

    For myself, I think the chances of a coup are very slim.

    My question is why a bunch of top-drawer generals gathered under the HRF tent and came out blasting against Cheney in September, on issues (Gitmo prison, torture) that the new president has already (in their view) turned around.

    Ie, it strains credulity to think people like Krulak and Hoar and Lenhart (the latter still active) would raise their profiles and such a ruckus at this moment simply to bash a retired, old, disgraced vice president — unless in fact Cheney actually represents a vital [call it what you will -- movement?] within the power scheme.

    I guess this is related to Obama's first timid challenge (two weeks ago) of the Pakghanistan policy he so loyally cheerleaded last year and then inherited.

    http://newcombat.net/Conversation/2009/10/01/the-generals-vs-cheneyfour-days-in-september/

  14. avatar Anonymous says:

    @William Ney "My question is why a bunch of top-drawer generals gathered under the HRF tent and came out blasting against Cheney in September", Simple, they were to Cowardish to speak against him when he was in office. Speaking of Cowards read James Bamford's book "the Shadow Factory" and his TV Documentary "the Spy Factory" and see how EX NSA/CIA Boss Mikie H. let 9-11 happen and then spat on our great US Constitution. Sincerely, ShaJ

  15. avatar Sibel Edmonds says:

    Same with the others: Powell & Wilkerson. It's easy to come out and speak when the wind has already shifted, ey! Let's not forget the double-face (maybe triple)Scowcroft…In fact the list is pretty long…Take your pick.

  16. avatar Anonymous says:

    “Bush Dark” Obama was on Senator Liebermann's homeland security subcommittee before he became prez. Barack surely knows the score and changes nothing.
    Looks like the complicity among the Demo’s and Repug's is solid. Change? Looks like business as usual to me.
    My thing is the fourth amendment: warrantless surveillance. The Bill of Rights, the sacred Fourth amendment is nullified, sacrificed in the name of national security, while everyone shop, shop, shops.
    Folks, watch what you say on your telephone. I wish I knew which specific department of government: Justice, FEMA, NSA, or DHS operates the main core database of 8 million Americans. The software that operates this unconstitutional outrage is Promis. The Prosecutor's Management Information System, a database system developed by Inslaw Inc., a Washington, D.C.-based, information technology company. (see Wikipedia). Which agency holds the service contract to maintain the software? Could a FOIA request be done to find out? Where to target the request if a big, big problem. Could Sibel’s blog provide more information on this interesting subject?
    It is difficult to be hopeful.

  17. avatar Doug Canuck says:
  18. avatar Doug Canuck says:

    From Chapter 23 of "Crossing the Rubicon"

    Kissinger PROMIS and TIA – Not long after Henry Kissinger withdrew his name as a candidate to head the independent commission investigating 9/11 – ostensibly because he didn't want to name his private clients – journalist Jim Rarey ripped the covers off an unnoticed bombshell in Kissinger's background. Henry Kissinger's partner in one of his consulting firms (Kissinger-McLarty Associates), and the Vice Chairman of Kissinger's other firm (Kissinger & Associates) is former Clinton Chief of Staff Mack McLarty. As it turns out McLarty also sits on the board of directors of a company called Acxiom.

    That name might not ring a bell, but Acxiom is a recent name change from a company formerly called Alltel which was once known as Systematics. Systematics is the information, communications, data processing firm owned by Arkansas billionaire and kingmaker Jackson Stephens. And Systematics has been part and parcel – linked in paperwork and court records – of the PROMIS software saga almost from day one. It was Systematics that reportedly received stolen copies of the software in the 1980s. If Inslaw founder Bill Hamilton ever had any doubt about the fact that the progeny of his creation were at the heart of TIA, he can lay it to rest now. In a December 17, 2002 story Rarey revealed that Acxiom had been selected "the lead company to provide software and pull together the network to furnish the information to DARPA's "Information Awareness Office" headed by John Poindexter.8

    http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/022803_chap_23.html

  19. Anonymous, regarding the Pravda link . . . someone posted something like this at my place and, as I mentioned there, there have been rumors for some time about Chiefs of General Staff being donme (Yasar Buyukanit and now Ilker Basbug). As you know, the pictures in your link are of Ilker Basbug.

    The fundamentalists in Turkey had a field day with those photos but it may be that rumors of being donme are the Turkish equivalent of Obama being a "secret" Muslim. In other words, I don't know how true such claims are and I'm a person who has absolutely no reason to see the general staff protected. But, then, I have plenty of real world complaints and crimes to pin on them.

    However, if you are interested in donme, you should learn what you can about Tuncay Guney. Check out this Wayne Madsen report for starters.

    By the way, I do think the illustrative photos in this post are quite appropriate.

  20. avatar Anonymous says:

    Sibel, Seriously, I just figured it out it's "the Fusion Centers." How can you Circumvent Posse Comitatus? Answer with "the Fusion centers." Mil. Intel can work with local law and the Feds and even the CIA can work in the US with "the Fusion Centers." Of course they are backed up by the NSA and DHS Cray Computers.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_center#See_also Sincerely, ShaJ

  21. avatar Anonymous says:

    Mizgin, thank you for the input and link. Also I posted earlier about Russia meeting Iceland officials regarding Icelands dire economic straits. Seems Peter Orszag name keeps coming up.

    Obama's Budget Director is Peter Orszag who headed the company that advised the Icelandic Central Bank in the prelude to the crash of Iceland's financial system. This has led to Iceland being fast-tracked into the Rothschild-created European Union to 'save' its economy. Orszag also advised the Russian Treasury when state-owned assets and resources were handed to Zionist oligarchs, including Roman Abramovich… fm

  22. avatar Kingfisher says:

    "Obama's Budget Director is Peter Orszag who headed the company that advised the Icelandic Central Bank in the prelude to the crash of Iceland's financial system. This has led to Iceland being fast-tracked into the Rothschild-created European Union to 'save' its economy. Orszag also advised the Russian Treasury when state-owned assets and resources were handed to Zionist oligarchs, including Roman Abramovich… fm"

    No. This is just plain wrong. There’s are plenty of factors and actors to blame for the global economic downturn, but the people of Iceland have one party to blame for why they have been walloped more than most have: themselves.

    They nosedived into the world of international finance, and tried to swim the backstroke when they should have been learning the doggy paddle. I am sorry that this has happened to what seems like a decent country and people, but writing this off as some Rothschild backed plot is irresponsible and wrong.

    For those interested in the story of Iceland’s economic mess, see Michael Lewis’ tragically hilarious Vanity Fair article: Wall Street on the Tundra.

    KF

  23. avatar Kingfisher says:

    Col. Patrick Lang (US Army, ret.) posted the TAC interview on his blog.

    From the post:
    "A remarkable interview. Giraldi is a very respected retired CIA field man.

    What emerges from the article is a picture of the Washington of the "K Street Project," the revolving door, consultants sold out to foreign governments, foreign national intelligence agencies doing their duty in seeking to learn American government secrets, foreign connected lobbies working hard to suborn the US Congress. Hanging over the whole thing is a miasma of endless, meaningless, boring symposia, conferences, power lunches, etc. I think it was probably ever thus.

    I am disappointed to think that Scowcroft is really like this.

    I always wondered what lay behind Grossman's supercilious arrogance. There usually is something, something. pl"

    Col. Lang was in charge of intelligence collection in the Middle East for the Defense Intelligence Agency; put simply, he knows what he is talking about.

    Sibel, he would be a great BF guest.

  24. avatar Anonymous says:

    Anon the Neocon-

    Good, I see my comment was deleted. It contained nothing offensive, yet it was deleted.

    You could have at least provided a link to the text, or noted that it had been deleted.

    The exercise of freedom is great ins't it Mrs. Edmonds?

    First you were the victim of the censors, now its you doing the censoring.

  25. avatar Sibel Edmonds says:

    KingFisher: Thank ou for the link, and suggestions. I will certainly add him to the list of BF interview requests.

    Anon the Neocon: Your writings have turned into nonsense rant. I believe everyone shares the same view on this, and many have voiced it here. You may take your Cold War Paranoia and Neocon attacks to other sites. Differences of opinion is one thing, but attacking and slandering and accusing me, Agent Cole, and others is a totally different story. You are no longer welcome here.

  26. avatar Anonymous says:

    http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=104&sid=1777449
    Sibel, with the new program iWatch, I suggest we start a FedWatch program and report everything suspicious done by the Feds to Uncle Sam, Congress, DHS, the FBI, the NSA, the DOD, the Local Police, the Fusion Centers, the UN, NATO, Interpol, ETC., ETC. and eventually to the Chinese (who will rule the world soon enough), and depending on which Feds are doing the bad deeds, you Narc on them to the other Feds or Groups. This could keep them tied up for years. What do you think? Do you like iWatch? Sincerely, ShaJ

  27. Mr. Neocon, you act like a f***ing moron because only a moron would compare what an individual enforces within his/her own property and the enforcement of censorship, especially the censorship of the bogus state secrets privilege.

    We–including YOU–are all guests on Sibel's blog, a property owned by Sibel which she has earned by complying with Google.com's TOS. She can enforce censorship as much as she wants within her own premises. If she tries to enforce censorship on YOUR premises, then you can complain as much as you want. She is a naturalized US citizen living within the borders of the USA, and is the owner of a webspace hosted by a computer within the same borders. Her censorship within her own premises is protected by the US constitution.

    HTF can you compare state censorship against Sibel, which has been enforced by certain elements of the US Deep State, with what Sibel does in her own "home"? Next, you'll want her password so you can go in and post your own stuff and change the layout to your own liking. Why don't you just go to her home, IRL, drop a turd on her living room floor and ask for toilet paper?

    If you behaved the same way on my blog, you'd be SO banned there, too. If you'd trespass onto my property, IRL, I would most definitely have cracked you over the head with a cast iron skillet before you could ask for that toilet paper.

  28. It continues to amaze me ANYONE is surprised by Brent Scowcroft being less than a saint. Didn't he once lobby for another corrupt enterprise, BCCI? Even if he didn't do anything illegal in that case, it is clear the man is after one thing: $$$$$.

  29. avatar heisenberg says:

    Don't forget, some zealous law makers are creating a "duty" to whistleblow.

    http://minnesotaindependent.com/46301/lila-rose-activist-behind-planned-parenthood-hidden-surveillance-videos

    Gotcha!!!

    It seems the First Amendment right to free speech includes an obvious right to decide when you want to remain silent.

    Any thoughts, Sibel.

    Pass a law, you have the Fifth Amendment that says you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself – but pass that law that you violate the criminal law if not going to the station house and ratting out on a spouse?

    How about that. Common law and now Rules of evidence embrace spousal privilege, as with doctor-patient, priest-penitent, attorney-client, but not with accountant client – so any zealous cop/prosecutor knows, squeeze accountants.

    But what if the legislature legislates and the courts go along?

    That Planned Parenthood thing, duty to rat, first interferes with doctor-patient privilege, with right to remain silent when choosing to, and such. Moreover, it leads to "I don't want you to show me ID with a birthdate, I don't have to believe anything you say about your age, etc." as evasions simply to compromise with a wrongful law.

    Any "duty to rat" seems to be a reverse side of the coin of
    "cannot rat out on state secrets."

    Any thought, how police states would prosper more easily the wider duty to rat legislation percolates?

    Pass a law,

  30. avatar Anonymous says:

    Anon the Neocon-

    Mrs. Edmonds, there is a comment here that is both inflammatory and off topic (argument you have now pulled against me)- do you want to delete it, or will you allow my next response (where I get back at Mizgin) to stay up?

    I can agree to your removal of a wikipedia – cryptome exchange I posted under your post. I think the point was legitimate as a comment, but it happened to be a first comment and I myself would have preferred to just link to it. I can side with you on that point.

    But what do you mean by "you are not welcome here"?

    Do you agree with the Constitutional Scholar Mizgin, that "ownership" trumps the First Amendment?

    I certainly cannot imagine Mrs. Edmonds – that someone like you who argues her case against the government appealing to freedom of speech, will choose draconian censorship against those so much as raise doubt about her story?

    How can you appeal to universal principle, if you are the first to demand exception from it?

    Do you agree with your reader Mizgin, that you can arbitrarily remove readers, because you are the "owner" of this website?

    If so – how "arbitrary" do you plan on being? Policy? No dissent? Fans only?

    I am confused, very confused.

    What other than question your story, have I done that you consider improper?

    For convenience I save my venom for Mizgin in a separate comment, since I am sure you'll delete it. I only ask that if you do so, that you also delete his inflammatory comment.

  31. avatar Anonymous says:

    Ok genius Mizgin. Repeat that for me again – US constitution guarantees what?

    SO you're a Kurd and a Constitutional scholar?

    For those whose hands actually carried out the massacre of the Armenians in that famous "Genocide" episode, the word scholar sounds oh-so-flat.

    My dear misguided goat-herder (again, still better than calling you turd, isn't it), are you insinuating Mrs. Edmonds' principles only go so far as her practical gain?

    Or that she is running a fan club here?

    Or that she can't take some criticism?

    "Private property!"

    May I remind you Mizgin, that if anyone is a guest on anyone's property – it is a Kurdish ethnocentric nationalist on American soil.

    Since you are apparently a self-certified genius Miz – let's see if your erudition is worth the blood of your soil.

    Mrs. Edmonds owns a webpage, but it is located on a server owned by someone else. If the server were to decide that Mrs. Edmonds has violated her contractual obligations with the FBI and the US government, and is using the website to further such violation – guess what?

    I can just see you coming to the defense of the server on the basis of "ownership"

    Contrary to your "erudite" claims, private ownership in no way trumps constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech. That my dear depends on the circumstances. The minute a forum is considered public – Bill of Rights come into effect.

    FYI genius – name me one newspaper that is not privately owned? On what grounds then do you argue

    1) For freedom of speech
    2) Against media censorship
    3) Against media omission
    4) Against media manipulation?

    Smarty boy – I await your answer with delight.

    That said, I guess you must be in your early twenties, or worst case-late twenties – judging by the efficiency of your reasoning. Since you bring in the entire "private property" issue.

    Unlike Mrs. Edmonds, I am not citing the Bill of Rights in my amicus curae.

    Mrs. Edmonds argues her case appealing to the first amendment and freedom of speech, claiming she is a victim of censorship.

    It is a stretch to characterize my comments as irrelevant, insulting, or disrespectful. I bite back when I am bitten, as any careful reading of the history here, can reveal.

    Nor is there any relationship between asking for a key to someone's car, and asking simple questions about one's sources, or background questions. You guys are always digging in the past, to argue against the Police State bogey-man.

    ***

    I am fully aware Mrs. Edmonds can do with her forum as she pleases, but I am certain that besides Mizgin here, everyone would agree that "as she pleases" DOESN'T translate into arbitrariness.

  32. avatar heisenberg says:

    I am uncertain -

    I see Anon-Neocon saying "censorship" and I do not see over what.

    Credibility is at stake.

    A separate post for this question, of whether the claim only true believers, those drinking the Koolaid by cupfuls, are welcome.

    It is a most serious situation where people like me do not know what was pulled and only see back-and-forth about proprieties, and property thrown in to muddy the waters.

    I suggest a separate post – Sibel, saying this was the comment, this is why I pulled it, and this is to me sufficient to police comments this way.

    Then we judge whether to keep accessing the 123 Real Change blog, in an informed way.

    If it is only for indies, not outsiders, so be it. But make it an informed thing, this situation as it stands – something pulled, called "inappropriate" saying, what?

    That galls.

  33. Still asking for toilet paper, eh, Mr. Neocon?

    If the server were to decide that Mrs. Edmonds has violated her contractual obligations with the FBI and the US government, and is using the website to further such violation – guess what?

    I guess they haven't done that, have they, Mr. Neocon?

    Are you insinuating that she has? Maybe you could bring that to court since you're so obsessed with it.

    All of your whining boils down to this: You don't accept that members of both houses of Congress accept Sibel's credibility, as does the DOJ Inspector General, as do a number of FBI agents, as does at least one ex-CIA guy, as do the journalists who investigated different parts of her story in the London Times, Vanity Fair, and 60 Minutes.

    Keep asking for the toilet paper.

    Wouldn't it be hilarious if your real name were Marc Grossman? At least he has a real reason to go around denying and insinuating.

  34. avatar Anonymous says:

    Anon the Neocon-

    Clarification is needed. I AGREE with Edmonds' removal of my initial comment – it was a copy-and-paste from a Cryptome-Wikilieaks exchange, – I just wish there had been a trace that the comment was deleted.

    I obviously thought it was relevant in substance, but less in form. Like I wrote above, I would have prefer to link to it.

    But it may be good to have a speech policy on your site Mrs. Edmonds- looking arbitrary, isnt' good for anyone's credibility.

    The real issue here is a Kurdish Nationalist a.k.a "The Constitutional Scholar," who proffered some rather bland if insidious arguments FOR censorship in principle. AND Mrs. Edmonds rather stark "you're not welcome here".

    But hey, I posed my questions, and it has been decreed some time ago, that as long as it is the "Neocon" doing the asking – the questions are discredited by "association" (i.e. not worthy of consideration).

    @Kurdish Nationalist- my dear Mizgin – you can boil whatever you want – frogs or goats, you'll still remain a mizgin.

    I understand that in most backwater crags of the world a rather arcane sense of "property" of the patriarch predominates – even a Sultan couldn't touch a man's chattel.

    It's only natural that a "mizgin" would come along and decide that Edmond's 5th and 14th have been violated! (see if a mizgin can figure what those numbers refer to – wait, don't give him any hints you Archie Bunkers out there ;) A mizgin after all, is pretty clueless on the entire subject. This one sometimes resorts to universalist democratic rhetoric – although like all mizgin – his interests are 100% ETHNOCENTRIC.

    Anyone

  35. avatar Anonymous says:

    Anon the Neocon-

    Another for the Record:

    I have not once – to my recollection, called Mrs. Edmonds a liar. Nor have I ever intended to question her credibility. If credibility became an issue, it was as a result of the following.

    In my comments I have rather consistently (dissent is welcome):

    1) Assumed that largely, Mrs. Edmonds' claims are accurate, but

    2) that she is careless in her conclusions.

    I expressed both by

    A- repeatedly asking for concrete information, differentiating ideology from fact.

    B- asking for the sources of the "facts" (eg first hand, second hand, or third hand sources).

    Reading her posts, I came to the conclusion that there is a serious ideological bias to her work – and that's what I ended up attacking.

    Had she doubted her conclusions for a second, she would stop portraying herself as a victim of arbitrary state-secrets privileged, media censorship, and political-cabals.

    I have speculated that Mrs. Edmonds is indeed hurting our national security, and I have questioned whether she does so intentionally (as part of a Russian intelligence operation) or out of blindness (ideological, naivete), or simply for profit (selfish gene).

    However, I am willing to admit that Mrs. Edmonds bias exists, because she is surrounded by groupies. If she spends her time talking to a wall, well, the wall spends its time in silence. The two sides are not communicating, and bias is building up.

    I believe I've done nothing more than subject Mrs Edmonds' claims to minimal scrutiny. As a result I stoke the ire of the groupies, who then consistently proceed to reveal themselves for what they are – America-bashers and ignoramuses.
    Hence half of them balked at the very idea of Edmonds debuting for a Buchanan publication.

    Then I posted a comment, from someone very experienced in leaking information and dealing with the government. Mr. Young of Cryptome. In it he observed that whistle blowing is a business – to which I personally ad – with a lot of self-righteousness and little scrutiny.

    If this is a conslusion I make as a result of interacting with the most "gagged person" in US history – then I will be pardoned the slurs, I would hope.

    However, lest anyone missed the point – I have always praised Mrs. Edmonds for wanting to engage ordinary Americans. I think she is very open minded, and very democratic – but will increasingly isolate herself with people who are not, and hence corrupt her own spirit even more.

    PS for goat-herders:. Just because I assume Mrs. Edmonds claims are close to reality – doesn't mean they are. A certain mizgin questioned the logic. "Huh?! How can you believe it and not believe it". I will not elaborate- suffice it to say – that those who understand the difference, set themselves apart from those who don't.

  36. avatar pj98rider says:

    Ms. Edmonds is biased. Why wouldn't she be. Walk in her shoes and see where the bias lies.

    Groupies?…more like supporters and strong supporters at that.

    This is Sibel's site…it's her rules period. It's not "Fair and Balanced" and "free speech" doesn't apply. It's a 'effin blog. It's take it or leave it for what it is…not hard to comprehend.

    As far as her credibility…she been attacked and vilified and still comes out smelling like a rose. Don't think she is? Find some one else you think is credible.

    Criticism and asking serious questions are important to any discussion. When it goes beyond that, Sibel's call on what to do…it's her site. MHO on all this.

  37. avatar Anonymous says:

    I agree PJ, There is this saying about the flak you take when you directly over the target… My case is the renewable energy sector. I have written 4 books on the subject under contract for a for a certain State Government (Maine). I was also involved with matters pertaining to Electricity Deregulation (1999-2000) and had petitioned to intervene regarding related utility matters.

    Prior to that were issues I had addressed regarding low level military flights (100 feet (AGL)above ground level) within the so called Military Operating Areas (MOA's) of Maine and other states that were proposed by the GW Bush admin.(after the BRAC closed Loring AFB), the low level flights was within the identified wind regimes in Maine. George Mitchell probably got a kick out of my letter to the "ADJUNCT GENERAL"!

    Since Loring AFB was closed because the USSR (and Native Americans) were no longer a threat, It seemed windmills were the new problem.

    Somehow Enron et.al., during the same time period were working on the "other side". I cite Kenetec US Windpower who was forced into bankruptcy at the time…more..fm

  38. avatar Anonymous says:

    Kenetec US Windpower was at the time the largest Windpower developer in the world. The company had a project underway in the Black Sea area and a project in my home State of Maine on Kibby Mountain. Somehow, "out of the blue", they were forced into bankruptcy.

    Shortly thereafter, a Maine based entity went to California to bid on the Kibby propety. This individual was the only bidder and was the only bid for said property by deadline. Low and behold, Enron shows up after deadline and submits a bid for only a few dollars over. The judge accepts the bid…….

    Anyway, the Maine based entity (who lost the bid) teamed up with Enron after the fact and ended up with more "grief" regarding development in Maine. One evening at about 4pm I had received a call from the executive of the Maine based entity, who told me that Enron had promised to pay for the interconnection study fee of USD 1 million with the NE-POOL (New England Power Pool (now ISO-NE)had just backed out of the deal (an attempt to drive the Maine entity into bankruptcy and the aquire its assets.) The deadline was 5pm. PROJECT OVER.

    In the meantime, I spent a lot of time and (my) money researching areas outside of the high mountain regions. There were areas to avoid due to scenic and other impacts, however, I did identify areas that were feasable. I did have a contract with the Maine DECD to conduct a Wind Resource Assessment on Mars Hill, Located in Mars Hill Maine. More on this….

    At the same time I had finished writing technical primers regarding windpower; micro hydro and fuel cells. Included were efforts regarding MPUC hearings regarding issues with utility interconnected self generation; distributed generation and my succesful effort to stop "sneak legislation" to allow utilities to form affiliates to own Generation assets (Under deregulation, utilities had to divest generation assets).

    During an informal meeting held at the Maine PUC, regarding utility compliance regarding customer interconnection, I was asked by a commissioner if I was having problems with utility compliance. I responded in the affirmative.

    Immediately an individual who was employeed with the Maine DECD, with whom I had the Wind Assessment contract with stood up and clearly and loudly said that the contract was cancelled and that he was one of the first customers of the Maine Interfaith Power and Light.

    I will state for the record that the Maine DECD employee is an AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (reserves). It is also known that Maine Interfaith Power and Light was present during the Dick Cheney energy task force meetings.

    The earlier mentioned wind power assessment was 11 months complete. each month I was to send the processed data to DECD. Obviously I had to remove the equipment and file for bankruptcy. About a month later I had recieved a letter from DECD that stated "Mr. C. said that my equipment was severly damaged" and that is why the contract was cancelled. I called S. at DECD and advised her that was not the case. The wind data was never returned or any compensation received. But it seems that upc wind; evergreen; first wind "discovered" and developed Mars Hill, and several other sites I had identified in USDOE SEP-97.

    fm

  39. avatar Anonymous says:

    Anon the Neocon-

    she been attacked and vilified and still comes out smelling like a rose.

    WOW. Attacked AND vilified?

    When, where, by whom?

    Please show me two attacks and two vilifications. Four in total. In the MSM would be best (not a blog with 20 readers).

    Please!

    This is your chance to expose me as a lying buffoon!

    Oh- and believe you me – Mrs. Edmond's doesn't share your "I own this place interpretation".

    Something tells me she is so beyond such pettiness!

    Remember, I am a fan – even if frustrated :)

  40. Um… first rule of online forum:

    Don't feed the trolls.

    It only encourages them and, by extension, validates their agent provocateur trip.

    I know it can be frustrating, however, if action is to be taken, I suggest simply and quietly blocking the IP address. And if the lonely pathetic drunkard whose wife and children have obviously left him still has nothing better to do, then force posters to become members, and nobody gets to be anonymous anymore. Frankly, speaking as someone whose photo is posted here along with my name and email, I really don't see the problem with that. Sibel isn't anonymous. Why should you be? Pardon me… cowards.

    This is not a free speech website. This is not a street corner. And even if it were, you would still need a permit.

    When someone demonstrates repeatedly that they will say anything to be hurtful and attempt to drag the conversation as far off topic into self serving efforts to bring attention to themselves as they go through their second childhood, then, treat them like a child.

    If their own family cannot stand them, why should we? It is not our responsibility to care for other people's mentally ill family members.

    meta called it on the mark weeks ago in saying "I don't believe you are serious." Took the words right out of my mouth. The most blatant twisted spin and flip flop BS, accusing others of what one does so prolifically. When one is so obviously well read and possessing an intelligent mind, what does it say about you that you would rather spend your waning years tearing other people down on a personal level rather than building something of your own. Does Sibel remind you of your mother?

    And here all this time I thought it was only weak minded liberals who resorted to attacking their opponent when they couldn't offer any logical argument. neo-con. Snort, Sure you are. Keep telling yourself that in the mirror to give what's left of your pitiable life meaning at the expense of anyone else, keep believing it as you pour yourself another whiskey.

    Folks:

    Do not allow yourself to be drawn into disingenuous BS that is designed solely for that purpose.

    On the other hand, on a very zen level, one's enemies are your best friends. Anyone willing to attack you and show you the chinks in your armor are by definition your very best ally as they help to strengthen you. To take that out another step, if you can't handle the kindergarten level BS that neocon offers, what will you do with the real thing?

    Welcome it. Don't validate it by responding to it or allowing it to get under your skin or provoke you. It only makes it look like he's an actual threat when he isn't. He's not worth it. You are.

  41. @ Mr Maine/Alternative Energy

    Wind farms are BS. Centralized energy generation is BS. If you lost it all pursuing that aim, then that is a good thing. Take the hint, the universe is trying to tell you something. The ONLY answer is for each and every person to take responsibility for the energy they use and create it themselves. If you don't have your own windmill and your own solar panel on your roof, while supporting centralized power generation and calling it "change" or Progress, you are part of a game that has been sold to you. The matrix has you.

  42. avatar Anonymous says:

    @bh

    Distributed generation related directly to those who own this technology while at the same time being connected to the grid. It serves two important goals. One is to reduce or eliminate ones energy bill and two it provides voltage support to the grid. (I also done off-grid systems too.)

    In this case the deregulation of the electric utilities coincided with banking and insurance deregulation. The attempt I was involved in was fighting againt the utilities and their owners such as banks who were hell bent to kill off the competition and then get into the business themselves.

    The concept of electricity deregulation was that utilities kept raising rates to cover "stranded costs" which were to cover losses from bad investments, such as huge overrunns from new power plant construction etc.

    Just remember that the investors generally include large financial institutions. As the stranded costs grew utilities frequently requested rate increases until the end consumers finally had enough.

    The new regulations (2000-01)required utilities to divest their generating assets and become only Transmission and Distribution entities only. This in a nutshell became the First Bailout of the TOO BIG to Fail entities Bnaks and utilities).

    During the process, I was able to find proposed legislation that would, in a roundabout way, allow the BAILED OUT UTILITIES to form "affiliates" who could own generation assets. This did not go well with the PUC and was stopped.

    Representatives of the intelligence community also used their positions to financially
    gain too. Energy is a national security issue and I can asure you that intel gatered about key players resulted in insider info. being used regarding stocks and other matters. Illegal wire taps imho played a role too. Including having mail opened.

    In my case there is the fact that the state legislature passed a 2 year statuate of limitations regarding civil actions. A certain company somehow knew where to look just before my bankruptcy, then exactly 2 years lated formed a new company and discovers the site I assessed.

    My experience the time frame of the last 4 administrations. I know who the opportunists are and I know who the crooks are. Cap and Trade is WRONG. Only the traders and companies involved benefit from this new "fee" that will add to everybodys burden. Another story in of itself.

    Lastly, I was a candidate for the State House of Representatives. I can tell you a thing or two about election rigging.

    P.S. Sibel, sorry to get off topic here. Will not happen again.
    fm

  43. avatar heisenberg says:

    Since others are a bit off thread, our evolving police state status, is this comment off thread or not?

    Rep. Michele Bachmann. This photo:

    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v239/Pugripz/BakuBachmann.jpg

    Look at the shirt embroidery.

    Sibel, if your network of people, or Anon-Neocon yours, can determing how this particular member of congress got that particular shirt; and whether it ties into her stance on Israel and to Turkish affairs in the general region, I would be curious to know the answer(s).

    That individual has suggested that even the "nuclear option" should not be off the table in dealing with Iran. She has likened herself to "Queen Esther" and has said Iran has a secret plan to partition Iraq.

    Who is feeding her such information, along with shirts, or is she simply making things up.

    http://dumpbachmann.blogspot.com/2007/02/dfl-on-michele-bachmann-what-does.html

    http://dumpbachmann.blogspot.com/2006/09/bachmanns-nuclear-response-would.html

    http://dumpbachmann.blogspot.com/2006/06/michele-bachmann-and-queen-esther.html

    http://dumpbachmann.blogspot.com/2007/08/bachmann-going-to-israel-this-week.html

    http://dumpbachmann.blogspot.com/2009/05/bachmann-jan-markell-taking-about-the.html

    Is she just batshit crazy as many contend, or is there some tie to darker currents? I live in her district, and worry.

    (I hope I got all the links right. And, Hastert when she ran in 2006 for the first time came to St. Cloud, Minnesota, to aid fund raising efforts.)

    http://dumpbachmann.blogspot.com/2006/07/dfl-on-michele-bachmanns-fundraiser.html

    Haaretz on her being part of GOP Israel junketing.

    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerBlog.jhtmlitemNo=891798&contrassID=25&subContrassID=0&sbSubCont

    Any insights? Anyone?

  44. avatar heisenberg says:

    Earlier comment Michele Bachmann, Haaretz link is messed up, this is onscreen now:

    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerBlog.jhtml?itemNo=891798&contrassID=25&subContrassID=0&sbSubContrassID=1&listSrc=Y&art=1

    It is a link from another item in that list.

    In the 2007 time frame after that privately funded thing where Hoyer was lead spokesperson, there was this Bachmann traffic:

    http://foreignlobbying.org/legislator/Bachmann,%20Michele/

    See also, lead item:

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385×356054#356058

    Bachmann has been linked ideologically to Jean Schmidt. I do not know how traffic between the two offices, the Reps and staff, would be checked; those contacts need not be logged.

    If there's a strong answer, if anyone has info, but it is not worth a post on 123 Real Change, there's a tip email address for info here in the Minnesota Sixth Congressional District:

    dumpbachmann@gmail.com

    All for now, and if there's a police state concern with Turkish lobby involvement and/or coverup, that Baku shirt on Bachmann and the Livingston Group contacts Bachmann had regarding Azerbaijan are potentially woven into the fabric.

  45. avatar pj98rider says:

    Anon the Neocon,

    Show you four? Gee, I'm so sorry I couldn't reach your "credibility" threshold but here's two MSM pieces for you to chew on…

    On June 8. 2002, the Associated Press ("AP") published an article,which was widely disseminated on its news wire, quoting "Government officials, who spoke only on condition of anonymity," about Sibel Edmonds, that she had been disruptive, breached security, and performed poorly at her job.

    On June 18, 2002, the Washington Post published an article citing "Government officials" who said "the FBI fired " Plaintiff " because her 'disruptiveness' hurt her on-the-job 'performance.

    I think both qualify as attacks.

    "Mrs. Edmonds doesn't share your "I own this place interpretation"." It doesn't matter that she shares my interpretation or not. That's not the point. The point is, it's her blog, it's not a "free speech" area and she makes all the decisions on it whether either of us like it or not.

    "Remember, I am a fan"…yet you denigrate her other fans/supporters as "groupies" You say, "she is so beyond such pettiness!"…your smearing of her supporters as "America-bashers and ignoramuses" shows you're not.

    P.S. BTW, I'm not trying to expose you as anything. My station in life has nothing to do with you. I'm just stating my humble opinions on a blog run by someone who I deeply respect.

Speak Your Mind