Abby Martin and Sibel Edmonds on RT TV

The Obama administration has the worst track record when it comes to prosecuting whistleblowers. Obama once claimed he'd work hard to have a transparent government, but many have faced retaliation for revealing controversial government information. Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator and government whistleblower, waited 340 days for FBI clearance of her memoir but finally released it on her own, without any redactions or approval. It indicts high treason and intentional deception in the highest levels of government. Edmonds, founder of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, joins Abby Martin in the RT studio to discuss.

Ungagged: Telling the Sibel Edmonds Story

Published on May 8, 2012 by corbettreport

Despite the remarkable efforts to suppress the story, or perhaps because of them, the narrative of what Sibel Edmonds had to say finally began to emerge, less due to the occasional efforts of mainstream media organizations or supposed whistleblower organizations than through the diligent, painstaking efforts of independent journalists, radio hosts and documentary filmmakers who were willing to persist despite overwhelming odds.

Find out more about the quest to bring Sibel Edmonds' story to light in this week's Eyeopener report from

Thanks Joe!

Great - Pay Special Attention

This is a great interview. Thanks for posting!

Folks here should pay special attention to what she is saying about terrorism in Central Asia and the Caucasus. Every single significant incident has been controlled by the US. This is terrorism done by religious extremists, who are harvested from madrassas which are also funded by the US. Please ask Kevin Ryan to take note. Thank you!

"extremists," yes....

...but I wonder if they are particularly religious. I would also bet the majority of them know a lot more about taking apart and putting back together an AK-47 and the going pay scale for mercenaries than they do about the Koran. But that's just (an educated) guess.

Talking Turkey

Why do you wonder if they are religious and what educated your guess, in particular?

Please take a listen here:

What do you think about what Sibel mentions as “Plan B” in this interview (at 9 minutes and 11 seconds in the clip – appropriately); The post-Gladio destabilization campaign by the US is based on religion, not nationalism. Radical Islam is our foreign policy in certain parts of the world. Little kids are brainwashed from an early age in US-funded madrassas, using religion, in order to be used in Plan B.

Is this difficult to understand or do you just not want to believe it?

what about....

Countries like Iran, Syria, and Egypt to name a few have had sizable christian populations for centuries and yet the "radicals" generally leave them alone.... and still do for the most part. Even the elimination of Christian minorities in the Ottoman Empire at the beginning of the 20th century (AKA the Armenian Genocide) was organized by the secular Turkish leaders who recruited Kurdish criminals to do their killing.

You've framed the choices as either religion or nationalism as if it needs to be one or the other. In the Middle East there are centuries-old ethnic and cultural struggles that supersede both nationalism and religion and in many regions a disdain for western imperialism motivated by profit and greed unites a diverse cross-section of the region's population, Muslim or otherwise.

Even your own argument notes the manipulation by the west to carry out a non-religious agenda. So how can "religious extremism" be the problem? It can't because it isn't, even if the US tries to inject and aggravate religious fervor as part of it's plan for total domination.

So I maintain that religious extremism exists everywhere in every religion and none of it poses the the type of threat Homeland Security or the President and Pentagon would have us believe.


I was comparing religion to nationalism while comparing Gladio to Plan B. Yes, there are other reasons for murder, war, and genocide. Those are not mutually exclusive to the tool of religion.

You say that because these radicals are manipulated by the US, that rules out religion as a motivation. You simply are not considering leaders vs. followers in this logic.

You mention people who are not harmed in these areas - again, think about leaders vs followers.

You mention that the Pentagon and Homeland Security wants us to believe that religious extremism is a real threat. Oh, I almost forgot that those are the bad guys. So nothing they say can be true. Well, do you think the Pentagon and Homeland Security wants us to know that we are creating and controlling those same religious extremists? Why leave out that part of the context? Because, as long as you try to associate any argument with the bad guys, then that argument must be wrong?

Did you listen to what Sibel presented in the audio I referenced? Can you tell that she has seen the proof of these accusations? Please listen to the podcast if you haven't already. Sibel lays it out pretty clearly. Try to think of the mujaheddin fighters doing what they're told by their supposed "religious" leaders, who at some point up the chain were US officials. Then think of Al Qaeda as another name for the mujaheddin.

To deny the threat of religious radicals causes the inability to accept the horrible fact that a criminal US government is behind them. That is why I think blanket statements about religion having nothing to do with terrorism (9/11 included) are so detrimental. Not because I believe everything the effing Pentagon says - cmon!

money and religion

These former mujaheddin have gotten paid handsomely to fight in Bosnia, Chechnya and Azerbaijan. I seriously doubt that if they weren't getting paid they would volunteer to fight in any of these regions. So it ain't "religion" that gets them to commit to being mercenaries. IMO it's guaranteed that if we stopped paying them they wouldn't choose to be mercenaries, and this "threat" you talk about would essentially evaporate.

Real "terrorism" does exist and it is a complex dynamic that needs to be considered on a case by case basis. The best and most widely known example is Palestinian terror acts against Israel. Palestinians are Muslim and most Israelis are Jewish. But Islam and Judaism has nothing to do with that conflict. What motivates Palestinians is the fact that the Israeli government has razed Palestinian neighborhoods with bulldozers, among other things.'

I don't need to imagine "mujaheddin fighters doing what they're told by their supposed 'religious' leaders" because I KNOW they are getting compensated by their paymasters.

IMO saying former mujaheddin choose to be mercenaries because of their extreme religious views is like saying urban Blacks choose to sell crack because they are Black and are supported by their peers. In both cases it's money that gets them to make these respective choices and their backgrounds, etc. are basically incidental.

My problem with your stereotype about radical religious terrorism is that it feeds into the Pentagon's propaganda and muddies the waters in trying to understand and resolve genuine struggles of oppressed people around the world. When pointing the finger at religious extremism, you are addressing a symptom and not a cause.

And no, that fact that I don't fear any threat from religious radicals has nothing to do with accepting, believing or acknowledging nefarious behavior from the Pentagon, CIA, the military industrial complex or a host of other traitors. They are behind a lot of stuff.

one last point

I initially jumped on your comment because for whatever reason, you chose to throw the comments from this interview in Kevin Ryan's face. Both Kevin and Sibel are whistleblowers. I am a fan of both of them for different reasons and have followed their work carefully and find them both highly credible. Kevin's expertise is science and Sibel's is foreign affairs. The current reality is that Kevin holds Sibel in high esteem regarding her contributions and analysis in unraveling 9-11. Sadly, Sibel categorically dismisses Kevin's (and Gage's) analysis of 9-11 science. That's a problem for us, and personally, I don't think Kevin is the source of the problem.


Kevin Ryan is a whistle blower and a scientist. I respect the work he does and have been requesting for a couple years that Sibel interview him for BFP. His recent remarks about 'no muslims' have put me off because they contradict what Sibel is saying, not the mention the work of others. She, on the other hand, does not dismiss anybody's analysis - she chooses to concentrate on what she knows and should not be thought of as a problem for doing so - I wish others would do the same. There's a big difference.

Kevin's blanket statement about 'no muslims' is akin to Sibel saying 'no thermite'. I choose to trust Sibel's analysis of religious extremism being used to motivate terrorists more than Kevin's outright denial.

Have you listened to the podcast I referenced yet? How does Sibel's analysis affect your and Kevin's view of her expertise?

I appreciate your interaction here and agree with much of what you say about money as a motivator - and the US is behind that too. But your denial of the motivation of religious brainwashing is contradictory to what Sibel has shown in her analysis. Particularly with the funding of madrassas and Fetulah Gulen. Please listen to it and reconsider. Thank you.


No I haven't listened to the podcast, but because you know the art of polite disagreement, I will take some time to listen to it. I have listened to a lot of her podcasts and always find them informative and I'm a paid subscriber to BFP. More than likely I will find her analysis credible, but I doubt it will change my view.

If it is true that US operatives are funding brainwashing efforts and cultivating religious fanaticism, then those being brainwashed are victims, and I'm not the type of person who goes around blaming victims for anything. It's the brain washers we need to worry about.

Your point about "no Muslims" vs. "no thermite" is well taken, but she basically does dismiss the entire CD perspective, most notably in her (worst) podcast with Jon Gold. When Peter Collins extolled the credibility of Richard Gage, true to form Gold attacked the CD crowd and Sibel sat quietly. That's a dismissal. Jon and Sibel seem to think their "facts" are more relevant than the game-changing scientific facts that Steven Jones, Gage, Ryan and Harrit have uncovered about the murder weapon. I don't agree with Jon and Sibel's perspective on that, though this thread is not the place to argue that. You say that you have encouraged her to have Kevin Ryan as a guest. Like Sibel, Kevin is a notable 9-11 whistle blower who lost his job over it. One would think a 9-11 whistle blower would have no problem having a conversation with another 9-11 whistle blower who suffered the same fate. But she won't go there. What does that say? Truly?

I'll leave you with two questions:

1) If these "religious extremists" were only offered 3 square meals and good standing with Allah, but no money, do you think they would have taken up the offers to fight, spy, and terrorize people in Bosnia or the Caucasus?

2) If the PTB that's attempting to brainwash people were unable to get recruits for their terrorism plots from their brainwashed victims pool, do you think they would look for other "religious extremists" or elsewhere for ANYONE to do their fighting and spying, religious or otherwise?

I'm sure you can guess my answers.

Thanks for the sincere discourse and I'll be sure to listen to the podcast you've recommended. And if I drastically change my view, you'll be one of the first to know. I'll either find you here or at BFP.

right back at you

And I agree about not blaming the victims. I don't think the brainwashed are the decision makers most of the time either.

As for Sibel not hopping on the focus about cd, I really can't blame her. She has too much credibility and investment in her own story and expertise. I thought she should have him on the show because it would be interesting to the community. But I can see why she doesn't - she's been vilified by some for mentioning hijackers. The main point to take away is that she doesn't need to and we shouldn't need her to. No problem.

To your questions:
1 - Hey, you're preaching to the choir about the power of money for the poor. I haven't been that poor but grew up without much in the money dept. You know, I've met some really fucked up people in my life and I can honestly say that there are some people who truly are not very pragmatic when it comes to religion and money. People that do without because of religion in a non-practical way and sometimes hurt their children because of it. If you have ever visited the Bible Belt in the US, you might get a sense of what I'm talking about. And I don't think those abortion clinic shootings are motivated by a $500 reward. So, no money is not the ONLY motivator, but yes, it is a BIG part of the story.

2 - Merc's exist - no question. Just ask Blackwater, Xi, whatever-they're-called-now. Agreed. Not mutually exclusive.

I appreciate your consideration. I hope the answer can be in the gray area a little more than just black and white. What I'd like for you to take away from Sibel's interview by Corbett (I call it Talking Turkey) from last Dec. is that it describes an MO for our international relations in the middle east, central asia, and caucasia, and against Russia and China. And lays out all this illegal shit by the US reps and depts - It's still so surprising that she has said the same under oath (avail on film/youtube - Krikorian case) and almost no journo's pick it up. Frustrating.

I am satisfied with what you've said and hope for the best. Thanks for supporting BFP too.


This was good. We covered a lot of turf and proved people can disagree about gray areas in a civilized and meaningful way and still remain united in the cause. We need more people like you and less people like (????) in this movement.

I completely understand why Sibel might shy away from CD and people like Gage and Ryan, but I can only imagine how much more powerful our efforts might be if Sibel and Kevin were able to explore their experiences together. IMO it's the type of united front we need to win this fight and though I'm not particularly religious, I am praying for that day to come.

All the best.

your link

Hey, Just tried to listen to the podcast you recommended and I can't connect to Corbett Report via Firefox. Curious to know if it's just me and my computer.

Corbett Down

It looks like the whole site is down. I'll look for my downloaded copy and try to make it available.

Thanks for letting me know.

Turkey Talk

Here's a link to the mp3 file. I uploaded my copy to a sharing service. I hope James' site comes back soon. It looks like he's on vacation too.

Please let me know if it works.



listening now

great interview

Half of what she talked about I already knew and the other half likewise reinforces my positions. These militant groups are essentially powerless without the backing of major powers. Left alone, radical militants pose no global threat. They are easily infiltrated and the problem is that instead of infiltrating them and shutting them down, certain powers instead infiltrate them and manipulate them for their regional or global ambitions.

What you don't know about me is that I am Armenian and have worked at an Armenian-American newspaper for more than 25 years. I am constantly exposed to international sources of information in several languages about Turkey, Azerbaijan and the Caucasus and the cover-ups and distortions in US media about that region and have been since long before 9-11. So I know a bit about "terrorism" in and from that region and some of that knowledge is first hand. For example, In the 1980's I used to go to picnics at a campground where it was discovered that ASALA (look it up) used to bury their weapons until it was infiltrated and shut down by the CIA. Needless to say I know a little about that story that never made it to mainstream news. I've been dealing with these issues for a long time. That's one of the reasons why when I heard the OCT I thought it was preposterous. These groups cannot outsmart the CIA or Mossad or the national security apparatus -- even prior to all of the the post-911 security build-up. No fucking way. And the dancing Israeli Mossad agent admitted as much on Israeli television when he said he was there to document the event. So everywhere I go I work to dispel the terrorism myths and try to get people to take a hard look at the real culprits.

So be careful what you say about terrorism. It's a complex issue with a lot of nuances.

Thanks for the link. I'll be forwarding it to a few friends.


It feels like we're speaking two different languages. I must not have expressed myself correctly.

Can I ask a simple question to help clarify your position (I feel so stupid):

Is religion a factor in terrorism AT ALL? It's a simple point of clarification. If you say no, then I will give up trying - because that is, to me, an insane, irrational answer.


Sorry for the use of CAPS. I'm a little frustrated.

Blanket statements about religion having NO PART in terrorism are:



What you're telling me now, with your bona fides, is that your position is that Islamic extremists aren't a threat on their own. That is not an argument against what I have been saying. But it IS an argument against what has been said about 'No Muslims'.

Maybe we're on the same page and I just don't know it. I'm sorry if I communicated without clarity or if I am unable to get my position across.

Can you find no NUANCE between religion and manipulated religious extremists? I am not blaming Islam for anything!

Now that I think about it - there is no argument. Only protection of dear leaders inability to accept criticism for language? That is also frustrating. Everyone should be able to take some criticism. I will try to myself.

Please excuse my attitude. I don't want to offend you. But I can't help save this post instead of wait until I calm down. My fault entirely.


They can't be manipulated, or even supported, if they don't exist. Isn't that logical?

of course it exists

You and I are hogging this thread and should probably take this off-line. I think in the final analysis we are on the same page, but we understand the nuances a little differently. I'll pose it this way:

Is there an identifiable common "fanatical religious" motivation between:

1) Palestinians bombing cafes in Israel?
2) Armenians bombing Turkish embassies?
3) KKK lynchings in Louisiana?
4) Bomb attacks in Northern Ireland?

If so, what is it or do each of these situations need to be evaluated individually and in context with other non-religious circumstances?

You can contact me directly through this site if you want to explore this privately and so we won't bore everyone else to death or we can keep going until the mods boot us.


I think I can wrap it up on this thread as well. Thanks for saying they exist. That is all I needed to hear from you. That is all I was wanting for Kevin Ryan to take notice of, especially with Sibel's Talking Turkey interview. I'm glad you appreciated that interview - I think it's one of the best.

I was not saying and would not say that all terrorism is religiously motivated. I was not saying and would not say that other motivating factors are not involved. I was not saying and would not say there are not complexities and nuances. I would not say it on a thread. I would not say it in my head.

It was because Kevin Ryan said "No Muslims" that I was trying to have him take note that the USA has an MO of using people who are sometimes influenced by religion by nefarious means to do nefarious things. This is a pattern of behavior by the USA. This MO/pattern is important context when discussing the events of 9/11/2001.

I'm sorry if you thought I was trying to over-simplify the issue and I appreciate your invitation to talk privately and will do so if I have something useful to add. In fact, I am not ordinarily overly focused on religious extremists. My main focus is on the criminals in the USA government and their sickening, poisoning, disgusting crimes on many dates.

And to Kevin Ryan, I'm sorry for being rude in my communications. I could have approached you with more respect and politeness. I hope to someday hear a clarification about your statements on the issue that takes into account the pattern/MO discussed above.

Bye for now.

I hope this is over, but......

What Kevin said is Muslims were not responsible for 9/11. He didn't say there is no such thing as Muslims committing acts of terror. I'm undecided. I really don't know if there were any hijackers or if there were, if any of them were fanatical Muslims. I lean toward Kevin's perspective because most of the sources of information on the issue are US government officials. But IMO we don't really know.

Don't Know

Don't know is better. I think you and I are clear now. Thanks for the time and clarification.

I think this bridge needs attention, but I'm good for today. Sorry if anyone was bothered by the hogging of the thread.

Don't feel so bad

A more useful exchange than other threads of such length that I've seen on this site, IMO. FWIW.


You forgot to mention the terror by the Israelis. I think religious extremism plays a part.

nice job, Abby

your prep for this interview paid off in spades. Good work.

Thank you!

I just wish we had more time, there is so much ground to cover. But was really honored to be able to interview a great American hero!


and many more to come.


Couple more recent interviews with Sibel about the book

Last Thursday I was on Occupied Territory with Mike Feder at Progressive Radio Network. This was my first experience with this show and it left me impressed with Mr. Feder. No boohaha, no sound bites, no boisterous interruptions … A highly informed and articulate host who comes prepared and tackles his subjects with diligence .

You can listen to the show here.

Also last week, on Friday, I was on Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock. I had an entire hour to discuss Classified Woman and beyond. I’ve been on Mr. Hancock’s show many times and truly enjoy his passion and stand on ‘real independence.’
You can check out the entire show here (I am on hour two), or, you can listen to my interview section here

Thank you both.

It's interesting that after all of her experiences Ms. Edmonds was hoping that her situation would improve when Obama took office.



wrong reply

Very cool interview.

The corruption exposed by the book extraordinary and sinister. Systemic information flow breakdowns. Espionage EVERYWHERE condoned by in-house protection. A real-life and working 'crippled Epistemology' for CASS Sunstein and Adrian Vermule to study. WOW. The deceptions of 911 CONTROL and cover up, deep dark and dirty. Illustrative of just how it applies to everyday compartmentalization and fear based model. Fits very well with Susan Lindauer's work as CIA whistlblower. Agent Frields needs INDICTMENT.
Director of FBI Mueller has been there right the way through. Continuity of control TOP down.


[Qt.Sgt_doom 2nd to last post] When the BCCI investigation reached closer to President Geo. H.W. Bush’s White House back in the late ’80s, early ’90s, Bush appointed Robert Mueller III to be the chief of the DOJ’s Criminal Division to manage the BCCI probe — or more accurately, to deflect it away from the Bush administration and narrow the scope of the investigation.

Four days prior to 9/11/01, President Geo. W. Bush appoints Robert Mueller III to be director of the FBI — perfect timing and what a pedigree Mueller possesses.*

*Robert Mueller III, FBI director, is the grandnephew of Richard Bissell, one of the three top CIA types who President Kennedy fired. Mueller’s wife is the granddaughter of Charles Cabell, another of those three CIA people JFK had fired (the third was Allen Dulles, who would later manage the Warren Commission!

post has great input by albury smith in new form as well:)

Interesting about Mueller

Besides the BCCI case, Mueller also did his utmost to frustrate independent counsel Walsh in the closing stages of the Iran-Contra investigation. That also was in service to the personal interests of George HW Bush. That service to the Bush family was remembered and rewarded by his appointment to FBI chief by George W. Bush in 2001 (assuming office just one week prior to 9/11).

I did NOT know about the family connections to Kennedy-era CIA officials. Very interesting.



Sibel Edmonds

On the Thursday, May 17, 2012 edition of the Alex Jones Show, Alex talks with former FBI translator and founder of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, Sibel Edmonds. Her allegations of misconduct within the FBI following the attacks of September 11, 2001, came to the attention of the Senate Judiciary Committee and led to a call for an independent audit of the FBI's translation unit. She subsequently gave sworn testimony accusing current and former members of the government of treasonous activity. Edmonds is the subject of a documentary, Kill the Messenger, and she hosts a website, Boiling Frogs. The FBI has attempted to prevent the publication of her book, Classified Woman: The Sibel Edmonds Story. Alex also covers the Obama impeachment bill, calls for a more invasive and “tougher” TSA, and the continued government crackdown on raw milk.

Sibel Edmonds: Obama's Despotic Rule Over America