“Gagged But Not Dead.” Yet.

Remember Sibel Edmonds? She’s the whistleblower who exposed Bush administration ineptitude and malfeasance inside the FBI –

When she was hired by the FBI as a translator after 9-11, Edmonds, a Turkish American born in Iran and fluent in Farsi and Turkish among other languages, discovered an odd network within the FBI where, among other things, relatives of foreign diplomats were working as interpreters. They were translating FBI wiretaps of foreign diplomats suspected of spying. As it turned out, these suspect family members were relatives of the translators–in other words moles working in the translation section.

Edmonds found her own initials forged on improper translations of documents–translations she had never seen before.

Edmonds was startled when what she considered ill-trained and incompetent interpreters were sent to Guantanamo Bay to translate detainee interviews. For example, one Turkish Kurd was dispatched to interpret Farsi, a language he did not speak.

Edmonds learned that a longtime reliable FBI asset who reported on Afghanistan, told FBI agents in April 2001 of al Qaeda?s plans to attack the U.S.

In the course of her work, Edmonds discovered Islamic terrorists might well have become entangled in ongoing international drug and money laundering. She suspects that this knowledge was one of the reasons the Justice Department classified everything in her case.

When Edmonds sought to protest these and other irregularities to her superiors in the FBI, she was called a ?whore? by her supervising agent, who told her he would next see her in jail. She was dismissed and escorted out of the FBI building. Edmonds never got a hearing before the 9-11 Commission, though she did have a chance to tell her story, sort of, on the side. A recent federal appeals court hearing on her case was made secret in the interest of national security. All in all, she was cast out as an enemy of the state. To fight back, she has launched a new organization to protect other government whistleblowers.

Copyright ? 2005 Village Voice Media, Inc.

The US government is pulling out all the stops to ensure Edmonds’ story is not made public.

In June 2002 the FBI itself acknowledged the truth of some of Edmonds’ allegations, and US Senators Grassley and Leahy wrote to the Justice Department Inspector General asking specific questions about Edmonds’ allegations – they say that the FBI has confirmed many of her allegations in unclassified briefings but that the letter stating this was later retroactively classified in May 2004. Members of congress have also published documents related to her case on their websites, only to be ordered to remove them on national security grounds.

I have often wondered why there seems to be a preponderance of women whistleblowers? Katherine Gun, Cynthia Cooper, Sherron Watkins, Colleen Rowley , Sarah Keays… it can’t be that women are more honest or fair minded than men. It’s only a personal theory, but it may be that as women tend to be kept outside the overwhelmingly male power structures within the average large organisation, they are already alienated, which might make coming forward less of a moral dilemma. Whatever the motivation, or gender, whistleblowers need support.

Edmonds has now gone online with her website, Just A Citizen. She has a petition to get rid of the gag order and requests that people link to her site to ensure the information stays out there. She is worried, and I can hardly blame her – these are not good people and they’ve shown few scruples so far. We owe it to principled whistleblowers to help, and we particularly owe it to women whistleblowers. They’re not just fighting organisational corruption alone, but as women, they have to fight doubly hard to be heard.

I urge you to link to the site and sign the petition. Let’s get the information out there. They can’t gag us all.

Hear Hear

I come from Florida, where you and others participated in what I call the United States coup d’etat. We need to make sure that it doesn’t happen again. Over and over again after the election when you stole the election, you came back here and said get over it. No we’re not going to get over it and we want verification from the world.

Congresswoman Corrine Brown

The rise of hate crime

David Neiwert explains why hate crimes are on the rise again in the USA:

— The country is being led by a cadre of thoughtless fearmongers who do not hesitate to wave the bloody shirt of terrorism to silence their critics and stigmatize anyone who acts “different.” The harmful effects of this behavior from our leadership on the general populace is incalculable.

— A particularly shallow brand of patriotism — replete with jingoist sentiments, hatred of The Other, and a hollow symbolism — has been promoted in every possible avenue, from national television broadcasts to the corner drugstore. This kind of thoughtless “Americanism” is an important feature of many hate crimes (including the one Death on the Fourth of July focuses upon) and plays a significant role in forumulating the motivations for this violence.

— Most of all, a fog of intolerance has filtered across the national landscape over the past decade, thanks mostly to right-wing propagandists with massive popular reach: Rush Limbaugh, Michael Weiner (aka Savage), Dr. Laura, Bill O’Reilly, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, and the whole phalanx of their imitators. The thrust of the modern conservative movement has morphed from any sense of real conservative values into a relentless attack on the very notion of tolerance for anyone who is not part of that movement: liberals, gays and lesbians, other faiths, other colors.

Brown v. Board of Education

Nathan Newman turns conventional opinion on Brown v. Board of Education on its head:

On the 50th anniversary, the conventional wisdom is that Brown v. Board of Education represented the moment when our nation realized that the majority could not be trusted with individual rights, that democracy had failed for the black minority and we needed unelected judges to save us.

Which is just bad history.

What the Supreme Court did was save us from unelected Senators, who had been put there by unelected judges on the Supreme Court back in the 1870s– when those judged killed the Reconstruction laws that protected minority rights in the South.