Urs Tinner et al, Free at last

AP via NYT:

"The Swiss government on Wednesday ordered the quick destruction of about 100 pages of evidence linked to an investigation of three Swiss engineers suspected of smuggling nuclear weapons technology. The cabinet said the documents were “the most explosive” material in a file of more than 1,000 pages related to the case against the Tinner family, which is suspected of links to the smuggling network of Abdul Qadeer Khan, one of the creators of Pakistan’s atomic bomb. The documents are copies of files destroyed in 2007 under a previous order that had led to protests from lawmakers and legal experts, who said the government had undermined the prosecution in the smuggling case. Citing security concerns and its legal obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the cabinet said that about 100 pages dealing with atomic weapons designs would be shredded shortly to keep them out of “the wrong hands.”"

Larry Franklin, Free at Last

Giraldi:

"For those who missed it (because it is not being reported in the MSM) Larry Franklin, the Pentagon AIPAC spy who pleaded guilty and was sentenced to twelve years in prison, has had his sentence reduced to probation and ten months of community confinement, which is presumed to be some kind of halfway house or possibly freedom to stay at home with some kind of monitoring bracelet. The adjustment was made last night by the same judge who let Rosen and Weissman go free in the AIPAC trial that was recently terminated without a conviction. Franklin did zero prison time as he was allowed to stay out of jail because of his willingness to testify in the trial. According to Franklin’s lawyer, Plato Cacheris the poor man has been having a rough time lately as no one wants to hire him… Cacheris ain’t cheap. Wonder who paid the bill?"

Politico:

"(Larry Franklin) didn't know at the time that Rosen and Weissman worked for the pro-Israel lobbying group (AIPAC)."

Too funny for words.

More from Politico:

"(Franklin's lawyer) Cacheris's description of Franklin's cooperation also produced some intriguing news. 

"He's given them other cases involving people who cannot come into this country," the defense lawyer said cryptically. 

Cacheris also suggested that Franklin was the target of witness tampering in the Aipac case. "Someone came to approach Franklin to have him, in effect, disappear," the defense attorney said. He said Franklin immediately reported the incident to authorities. 

Cacheris did not elaborate on the episode, but it could help explain why the FBI sought to interview Jewish leaders several years ago about attempts to provide financial assistance or employment to Rosen and Weissman. 

[...]

In response to a question from Ellis Thursday, Franklin confirmed speculation that his rendezvous with Rosen and Weissman was arranged by Michael Makovsky, a former energy analyst for the Pentagon. Makovsky, who has left the government, was not charged in the case and was expected to be a witness at the trial of Rosen and Weissman."

Makovsky's brother and father are both in Sibel Edmonds' State Secrets Privilege Gallery.

On the road

I'm still traveling. Blogging will be light for a few weeks.

What was Douglas Franz looking for?

Further to my recent post where I asked why John Kerry's Senate Foreign Relations Committee wanted Doug Frantz to meet the lawyers of Urs Tinner in Switzerland regarding AQ Khan's nuclear black market...

CQ's Jeff Stein asks the right question: What Nuclear Secret Was Kerry Aide Looking for in Switzerland?

Unfortunately, he doesn't get close to an answer, and his article ends weakly - or at least curiously - in my opinion:

But what was Franz looking for?  

"I wonder what political ends Kerry is seeking by digging into this," the intelligence operative, who worked on the nuclear black market, said. "Taking down AQ Khan is one of the agency's few public successes in the last decade."

Let's hope Stein continues his reporting on this.

(h/t Kingfisher)

Project Expose MSM: Michael Isikoff

Sibel outs Newsweek's Michael Isikoff.

Isikoff's response:

"Sibel-
sorry. No comment.
Regards,
Mike"

I suspect he won't be the last.

Free Roxana

Sibel:

I can tell you one thing with certainty: (American Journalist Roxana Saberi) Saberi was/is indeed CIA asset.

Greenwald:

Saberi's imprisonment in January became a cause célèbre among American journalists, who -- along with the U.S. Government -- rallied to demand her release.

Sibel:

I think the best place to start would be the breakthrough article by Carl Bernstein, THE CIA AND THE MEDIA , on how America’s most powerful news media worked hand in glove with the CIA.. Bernstein revealed that over 400 US journalists, over a twenty-five year period, had been employed by the CIA, as both freelancers and actual under cover CIA officers. Almost every major US news organization had CIA agents on their payroll with the full knowledge and cooperation of top management.

So many reports that are still entirely classified

New York Times, Justice Dept. Backs Saudi Royal Family on 9/11 Lawsuit:

The Obama administration is supporting efforts by the Saudi royal family to defeat a long-running lawsuit seeking to hold it liable for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
[...]
The government’s position comes less than a week before President Obama is scheduled to meet in Saudi Arabia with King Abdullah as part of a trip to the Middle East and Europe intended to reach out to the Muslim world.
[....]
But family members of several Sept. 11 victims said they were deeply disappointed and questioned whether the decision was made to appease an important ally in the Middle East. The Saudis have aggressively lobbied both the Bush and Obama administrations to have the lawsuit dismissed, government officials say.

“I find this reprehensible,” said Kristen Breitweiser, a leader of the Sept. 11 families, whose husband was killed in the attacks on the World Trade Center. “One would have hoped that the Obama administration would have taken a different stance than the Bush administration, and you wonder what message this sends to victims of terrorism around the world.”

Sibel Edmonds:

Well, again, I am just one part of a lot of different things as far as this whole issue of 9/11 goes, and my point has been, OK, we had this 911 Commission Report, we had this Joint Enquiry by the Senate & House, yet currently there are so many reports that are still entirely classified.

There is another report by the Department of Justice's Inspector General's Office titled "FBI and 911 Foreknowledge" which you can see on their website. That report was completed in July 2004, and it dealt with my case, Coleen Rowley's case, the Phoenix Memo, and even more, yet that report is entirely classified, OK.

There is another IG report on CIA, that report is entirely classified. Then there is that 28 pages that Senator Graham was referring to, that dealt with certain foreign countries and their roles, those 28 pages, even today, after all the campaigns by the 911 family members, remains classified.

If you have done the investigations, if you have told the truth, if you have a clean conscience, why don’t you come out and make this information public? What are you trying to cover up so hard? Going out of your way by gagging the congress, by stopping court procedures? They are going as far as just disregarding the constitution completely, total disregard for our system of checks and balances, the separation of powers has disappeared, why? Why are they trying to hard to hold back, and what are they holding back? Do they really come across as people with clean consciences? Honest people? I mean, the notion of the government of people, by the people, for the people, how many Americans actually believe in that notion today? They would laugh at you, you know why? Because when you look at it, it seems like a separate entity, with all this secrecy, and this power within power, totally removed from the American people.

More mafiosi than 'mandate.'

Gretchen Peters has a new book: Seeds of Terror: How Heroin Is Bankrolling the Taliban and al Qaeda. It looks very interesting - I hope to get a copy soon.

Gretchen Peters recently wrote a piece at Foreign Policy: The criminals running the Af-Pak border: Want to defeat al Qaeda and the Taliban? Stop thinking of them as terrorists. (hat-tip: Kingfisher)

Gretchen Peters writes:

The Obama administration has promised "a new way of thinking about the challenges" facing the United States in Afghanistan and Pakistan. But it's also high time it starts thinking in a new way about America's enemies themselves. The Taliban and al Qaeda have long portrayed themselves as holy warriors, battling under the flag of Islam. Most people in the West have accepted this characterization, imagining them as long-bearded fanatics, while Washington constantly refers to them as "terrorists" and "extremists." No doubt they are. But, having studied their operations at the village level in Afghanistan and Pakistan for more than three years, another descriptor also seems useful to me: criminal. When you examine the day-to-day activities keeping their networks financially afloat and probe how they interact with local communities in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Taliban and al Qaeda start to look a lot more mafiosi than mujahideen.

I don't pretend to be an expert on these matters - but I strongly suspect that this is the best way to characterize the 'mujahideen'. Similarly, we should characterize US politicians (and career professionals) the same way: more mafiosi than 'mandate.' Money and power always seems to over-ride actual representation of the people.

This has been my core operating principle since I started blogging. There is no such thing as liberal vs conservative, or republican vs democrat, or Islamist vs Christianist. For the people in power (and even those not in power) the only issue is self-interest.

As Sibel says, much of Bin Laden's support is not because of ideological reasons. They only support him, and 'terrorism,' because it is profitable.

Elsewhere (I can't find the link at the moment) Peters has researched counterinsurgencies and says that 'wars' that are essentially criminal-based last a lot longer than other 'wars.' It makes sense because people in power are making lot of money from/during the war - why should we expect it to stop soon?

Who in the US government is profiting from the current wars? Can we expect them to want to create peace?

Update - NPR interview with Peters here

John Kerry + Doug Frantz = Zero

Sibel recently made fun of John Kerry, and rightly so.

Nonetheless, Bloomberg is reporting:

(John Kerry) is wielding his gavel with an investigative zeal, and plans to take on Iran’s nuclear program, gun-running on the Mexican border, terrorism, narcotics and human trafficking, all through the prism of money laundering. He has hired a former investigative reporter, an ex-CIA agent and a one-time managing director of Bear Stearns Cos. LLC to help him.

“There are lots of big pieces out there that depend on money moving,” he said in an interview in his office in the Senate, where he is serving his 24th year.

If he wants to be a hero, good on him. I look forward to some actual evidence. I doubt I'll see it. If he needs some help, he can call me.

Given Kerry's history, he needs to either knock it out of the ballpark, or stay at home. On the positive side, I can't imagine why he might even take this on unless he really wants to solve some problems. I can't imagine him impressing me - but at least his mandate does.

Two *other* targets of *other* counter-terrorism related investigations

I transcribed an old (2005) Scott Horton interview with Sibel that hasn't been put in text before (shame on me) - you can read it over at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak.

I want to highlight a few statements.

Here's Sibel:

There are criminal and terrorist-related cases that our government chooses not to investigate, hypocritically, because it may affect certain sensitive diplomatic relations

And:

(Melek Can Dickerson) had ongoing relationships with two *other* targets of *other* counter-terrorism related investigations

And:

Now, not only that, now the FBI is saying that they are now starting to investigate it, but look, those targets of investigations, those people involved in those criminal activities, most of them left the country as late as February 2002, after I reported these issues.

I've made this point before, but it really is important. Two people who were heavily involved in the 911 plot were allowed to leave the country in Feb 02 without any repercussions. These people were Turkish 'intelligence officers' who left their posts in the aftermath of 9/11 before their contracts had ended because there was too much heat on them.

Who are these people? Why don't we know who they are?

I have written about these people before, but have not been able to find out who they are. Real journalists should be interested though, right?

More later.