The Sibel Edmonds Story Revisited - Manufactured Dissent

Wednesday, February 19, 2014, 08:00 pm
Caption Classified Woman - The Sibel Edmonds Story Revisited: Witting manufactured dissent or Unwitting useful idiot? You decide! (bookcover image via Classified Woman - The Sibel Edmonds Story Revisited: Witting manufactured dissent or Unwitting useful idiot? You decide! (bookcover image via
The following look at Sibel Edmonds illustrates how dissent contributes, unwittingly, or wittingly, to the “doctrinal motivation” of empire that ab initio launched, and now sustains, its “imperial mobilization”. These quoted phrases are not mine but Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski's from his American Mein Kampf, The Grand Chessboard - American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives ---- And most criminally, virtually all the “rebels” of the world who maintain that 9/11 was done by “militant Islam”, an invasion from abroad, are part and parcel of this same diabolical exercise to corral the public mind for imperial mobilization because, as Brzezinski summed it up: “Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization”. Nothing that might interfere with that exercise of imperial power can be permitted, and that includes dissent which is so laudably encouraged in the so called “free societies” of advanced Western democracies.
The neutralization of dissent by the control of the narrative to ensure that consent is effectively and continually engineered among “the crowd of simpletons and the credulous ... when the voting papers of the masses are the deciding factor”, as Hitler had so colorfully put it in his Mein Kampf, is evidently not taught in America's dissent landscape. It has been made a taboo topic, just like many other taboo topics in Western freedoms. Try challenging the official Holocaust narrative and immediately finding oneself without a job, for instance. In Europe and Canada, one actually goes to jail for it. Often, self-policing succeeds as much for unwittingly co-opting dissent as it does for manufacturing consent. However, more pernicious are the actual assets, the brilliant superman (in Nietzsche's parlance) diabolically planted in society, as journalists, academics, whistleblowers, et, al., who wittingly and willingly deceive the public with the exact same big lie in their dissent against empire as the mainstream scholars and intellectuals do pitching for empire. This Mighty Wurlitzer's machinery subsequently acquires a natural life of its own, catching in its deceptive wake many an unwitting accomplice who come to believe the big lies and echo it in their own celebrated dissent. Not sure how the two can be easily disambiguated – those who lie unwittingly because they believe the big lies themselves, i.e., self-deception, and those who are just ideological mercenaries, i.e. superman. Both are often highly intelligent, and to my mind, remain indistinguishable, unless they can be shown to be outright morons and mental midgets who, despite their high-falutin credentials, are ignorant of the vile and sordid history of false flag operations and self-inflicted terror as pretexts. Such blame can, however, hardly be laid at the doorstep of the brilliant high achievers who typically populate the avant-garde dissent-landscape and are celebrated as the grand conscience of the nation.
At Nuremberg, I often wonder, had engineered-dissent been part of the state sanction of the Third Reich to corral the type-2 and type-3 people whom Hitler had chosen to ignore as part of his engineering consent among the mainstream, the type-1 as he classified the categories of the public mind in Mein Kampf, would manufactured dissent con artists have escaped condemnation as having directly contributed to aiding and abetting the core lies, first lies responsible for enabling and sustaining all the war crimes of World War IV (II then) that followed?
Indeed, if Nuremberg set the precedent for making aggression culpable, in the immortal words of Robert Jackson, the chief prosecuting counsel for the United States, as the supreme international crime: “... the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” from which "all the evil that follows" is on the aggressor's sole neck, then, the core lies which enable aggression belong to the same logic. That was even proved by the military War Crimes Tribunal rejecting Nazi Operation Canned Goods, the pretext for launching the invasion of Poland, as nothing but a self-inflicted wound, a big lie, to “goosestep the Herrenvolk across international frontiers”, as Robert Jackson successfully demonstrated to the Military Tribunal. Jackson went even further. To deny charges of victor's justice, he piously argued: “... we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us.”
The subsequent fate of Nazi philosopher Dr. Alfred Rosenberg, and Nazi Reichminister for Propaganda Dr. Joseph Goebbells, is known to us all. If propaganda to control the public mind was not merely passed off as "freedom of speech", and Goebbels didn't escape the fate of vulgar propagandists, he only cheated the hang-man's noose with cyanide (see images here), then even propagandists who connivingly manufacture dissent, and aid and abet in promulgating the core-lies of empire in the name of freedom of speech, have a legal precedent before them --- only waiting to be argued by the likes of a future Robert Jackson at a future Nuremberg, victor's justice notwithstanding.
Just a thought.
Perhaps the brilliant dissent scholars of America may offer their wise opinion on the legality of hanging all vulgar propagandists today, and how they might go about framing who is a propagandist and who is merely using "freedom of speech" and "freedom of academe", keeping the precedents set at Nuremberg in mind. Specifically, I appeal to Dr. Francis Boyle who has at least multiple degrees in framing International Law, and Dr. Noam Chomsky, my own former professor who taught me all about Nuremberg, victor's justice, and hypocrisy.
But when the victors make the law, then like the proverbial king, the law-givers decide who is the pirate and who's the emperor.
Legalism or not, morally we already know where all narrators of the big lie stand.
Zahir Ebrahim

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Project 
Subject: Wikispooks page on Sibel Edmonds
In this letter, I just wanted to contribute a minor, tiny, dissenting view to the wikispooks webpage on dissent-chief Sibel Edmonds:
I chanced upon that page today, and clicking on the bolingfrogspost link provided took me to Sibel's so called "whistleblower" homepage where I again noted that dissent-chief, con man extraordinaire, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, is most prominently displayed. But first, to set the backdrop so I don't have to rewrite a whole new essay here, below is an excerpt from an Open Letter to Iranians, the part-origin shared by Ms. Sibel Edmonds. It situates the great Sibellian voice in the scheme of dissent that is permitted by empire:
Begin Excerpt
October 23, 2009
I composed this letter especially with you in mind, dear Iranian expat. living in the West. I feel it might be of at least some interest to you. Please share it with your many Persian as well as Occidental friends, colleagues, co-workers, and also family members living in the West. It examines the Iranian Question which has been prominent in the Western newsmedia ever since 911. But of late, the war-rhetoric is rapidly ratcheting up in many a public relations campaign of the Mighty Wurlitzer and is imperiling almost everyone's commonsense.
Many (but surely not most) Iranians living in the West since the Iranian Revolution, are the 'Shah' vintage. What that pertinently means is that some among them are easily harvested as dupes, patsies, and 'native informants' to speak against, and work against, their own native nation in the name of bringing it “democracy”, disarming it of its self-defense options, and what have you. This is of course called “secular humanism” in the West, and “enlightened moderation” in Musharaf's Pakistan. Most Iranian authors on the proverbial left, i.e., those dissenting with empire's barbarianism, are often quite anti-Iran in Iran's present dispensation.
For them, to oppose the crimes of empire is not necessarily to also not share in its aspiration of bringing Iran the West's 'white man's burden', its 'la mission civilisatrice', or in plain language, “democracy” western style. A perfect example of this ideological subversion disguised as lauded dissent is (see ), even assuming it isn't a “Soros” or “CIA Revolution”. Many native as well as second generation Iranians are part of this Hegelian dialectics seeded game, knowingly or unknowingly, as patsies or mercenaries, only they can tell.
I have unfortunately discovered that most Iranian authors become either inadvertently aligned with the hectoring hegemons which naturally colors their outlook/analysis/perspective on Iran to shades which are entirely under the same primary color scheme of the aggressors who wage endless wars – some obviously loud ones with signature-bombs, but many more silent ones by way of deception – or are outright ideological mercenaries and work against Iran. Here is an example of each. Surely one can come up with one's own favorite names in each category.
Someone who is ostensibly an anti-imperialist: the young Dr. Trita Parsi ( see ). Same with the highly celebrated elder academic and dissent-chief Dr. Juan Cole (a Bahai) on Informed Comment ( see ). If you forensically examine their work, it remarkably retains all the same sacred-cow axioms of empire, and mainly disagrees (dissents) with the empire in the “How” and to “what extent”. In their often erudite commentaries, they analyze the blood drenched puppet-shows enacted by the empire in great depth, analyze its impact upon the victims, analyze the victims' options, sometimes blame the victims intransigence, but to my knowledge, never proclaim, for instance, that 911 was an inside job, that the prime-mover of all the tensions and threats to the world is “imperial mobilization” and therefore, its prime harbingers, the Hectoring Hegemons, are the main problem as supreme war criminals; that they would all hang at Nuremberg; and the issue is not with Iran, Pakistan, Lebanon, Afghanistan, who are all its victims, or militant Islam, radical Islam, etc. which is a manufactured boogieman only to sustain its new transformational war, World War IV. See for instance, this response to Juan Cole's belated ex post facto discovery in March of 2008 that the invasion of Iraq was a conspiracy! Whereas, the un co-opted, or perhaps only the ordinary plebeians, protesting in the streets seem to know that even in 2001-2003, before it became a fait accompli.
An example of someone who is unabashedly an imperialist, like the Afghani-born neocon Administrator of Afghanistan and Iraq, Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad, and Pakistani-born neocon Ambassador of Pakistan and Hudson Institute Fellow, Hon. Husain Haqqani, is the pathetic war-mongering native-informant son of the distinguished Iranian Sufi-Muslim scholar Prof. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Dr. Vali Nasr. This pathetic excuse for a hominid, like all the rest of the war-mongers, is routinely published by the Council on Foreign Relations' Foreign Affairs magazine and is the Iranian version of Islamophobe Daniel Pipes cheerleading the mantra of “clash of civilizations” ( see for instance Foreign Affairs article: “When the Shiites Rise” reprinted at ).
In my experience, between the two categories, they together often color even the lenses of well meaning Iranians in the West, never mind the mostly ignorant Westerners, especially the Americans. There are numerous Iranians I know who don't seem to comprehend modernity at all. In fact, sadly speaking, despite their high education and affluent lifestyles, I have found them to be no different in their perceptions than many an ordinary mainstream American. What is most pathetic, I find that they have a few things also in common with “Uncle Tom” in their apologetics. Similar patterns, unfortunately enough, also exist among the expat. communities of Pakistanis, Arabs, Turks, and other minority immigrant communities whose native nations are under assault by their adopted nation.
The best example of the latter is the well known whistleblower Sibel Edmonds of Turkish/Iranian origin, and the new darling of Western dissent. To illustrate the convoluted interlocking of dissent-space with the pernicious bringing “democracy” aims of empire, the co-founder of the aforementioned is among Sibel Edmonds most ardent exponents as the founder of where he prominently features her travails. Here are my two letters of March 18 and March 27, 2008 to Sibel Edmonds regarding her whistleblowing-revelations. ...
End Excerpt
In the afore-cited first letter to Ms. Sibel Edmonds, dated March 18, 2008, I had observed to this "new darling of Western dissent"
Begin Excerpt
To: The courageous Sibel Edmonds (via email)
Founder, National Security Whistleblowers Coalition,
Alexandria, VA 22320.
March 18, 2008.
Dear Ms. Sibel Edmonds,
I chanced upon your work today from Daniel Ellsberg's essay “Pakistan's Bomb, U.S. Cover-up” (, and followed up on some of your fascinating disclosures and courageous efforts.
[T]his letter is mainly about the interpretation you have given to the facts that you discovered. It is not about your long and horrendous ordeal in getting the U.S. Government and the newsmedia to acknowledge that you indeed did speak truthfully about your discoveries and of your experiences and ordeals while attempting to bring them to light as a patriotic and concerned citizen.
The following observation by Daniel Ellsberg in his essay pointing out your work is intriguing:
' ... various American journalists in the last weeks have reportedly received calls from "intelligence sources" hinting that "what Sibel Edmonds stumbled onto" is not a rogue operation by American officials and congressmen working to their own advantage -- as believed by Edmonds and some other former or active FBI officials -- but a sensitive covert operation authorized at high levels. ... '
Indeed, the absence of this sense from your own writings, public disclosures, and the recent Times articles, in itself is intriguing to me. As one close to the investigations and to the 'gagged' data, i.e., being an informed insider, and also surely far better well versed than most among the public with the notion captured in this pithy saying of a former CIA counter intelligence chief (of over 2 decades) “deception is the state of the mind; and the mind of the state”, why is this line of inquiry missing from your own public assessments of your discoveries in the FBI recordings and in its files?
The consistent impression one gets from your articulations of your profound discoveries is one of mercenarial 'criminal rogue operators'. The Times article of January 8, 2008, too is sensationally titled “For sale: West’s deadly nuclear secrets”. Looking at 'Iran-Contra' in the same light (had such data been available) would certainly have led to an altogether different conclusion space. Whereas in reality, as known to all and sundry today, it was an officially sanctioned White House covert-policy to get Iran and Iraq to fight it out by arming them both in order to neutralize and contain the Iranian people's revolution, 'plausible deniability' and Presidential pardons among the guilty at the highest levels not notwithstanding. ...
End Excerpt
Those who have mentally accepted 9/11 being an inside job can easily recognize the Sibel Edmonds' revelations as belonging to the "red herring" and, at best, "limited hangout" genre. The intent of both is obviously to mislead people.
By that date of the letter, I had Ms. Sibel Edmonds pegged as only a "useful idiot" who knew very little of the matters she reported on and the snippets of low level chatter that she had translated was entirely contextless and most cleverly being used as a red herring. Meaning, not even "limited hangout" which imports to tell at least a half-truth, or a quarter truth, or weak version of truth in order to "inoculate" against the whole truth.
As a new "white man" (recent American citizen), Sibel Edmonds was psychologically behaving whiter than the white man in her expression of concern for her new nation as the proverbial house nigger. I have explored this topic in considerable depth in my article FAQ What is an Intellectual Negro?.
Anyway, as one can see, the tone of my first letter to Ms. Sibel Edmonds was deliberately most measured, respectful, and inviting her to study deeper under her own self-realization that she is merely being unwittingly duped. In a nutshell, Sibel Edmonds maintained the same core-lies of empire, the Osama Bin Laden, the invasion on 9/11 was from abroad by "militant Islam" due to American foreign policies, and generally the "blowback" version of the narrative sanctioned by empire. That "rebel" narrative had been the bread and butter for decades in America, at least since the Vietnam War, but especially most vocally since 9/11 for virtually all its dissent chiefs across its fictitious political divide, including Noam Chomsky, Daniel Ellsberg, Howard Zinn, Greg Palast, Robert Fisk, etc., on the left liberal nexus, and Ron Paul, Paul Craig Roberts, a couple of FOX news anchors whose name I now forget, etc., on the right conservative nexus. Ms. Sibel Edmonds, the good looking liberal new immigrant, like the conservative Indian Dinesh D'Souza already a presence in the Bush White House, nicely added the bird's voice to corral the remaining house-nigger immigrants from Asia as well as the American feeble mind that gravitates to beautiful faces (which is why advertising is big business), to this "collection pool" of dissent sanctioned by empire.
But in my second letter of March 27, 2008, written after most diligently studying her congressional testimonies and other statements for hours on end, I became convinced that she was a "witting" accomplice --- that she appeared to enjoy all this limelight and fame, and couldn't be just a simpleton moron who had just swam to the shores of America. So my tone changed in this next letter because now I felt she was deliberately participant in bringing imperial harm to our nations, Iran, Pakistan specifically, by lending doctrinal credence to future justifications of imperial attacks now in the making. That mantra today is firmly seeded into the Western mainstream narrative, called "loose nukes" threat for Pakistan, and the threat of Iran getting their own "nukes" and destroying Israel and the West.
Begin Excerpt
March 27, 2008.
Yet inexplicably, we observe courageous whistleblowers like Ms. Edmonds entirely silent on matters of “imperial mobilization” of her own adopted nation, or that 911 could have been an inside job because the “imperial mobilization” and dramatic increase in defense spending to affect the military transformation that immediately followed was precisely predicated on such a shockingly catalyzing event – the “new pearl harbor”!
She is also silent on how 911 could possibly have occurred in an armed to the teeth superpower without treasonous peoples on the inside aiding and abetting in its operational planning, logistics, and execution. And not just aiding and abetting inadvertently through their incompetence, or aiding and abetting thugishly by being in the pay of foreign governments, both of which Ms. Edmonds asserts likely caused an otherwise preventable 911 from occurring, but aiding and abetting in actually making 911 happen on purpose as a deadly military covert-ops by a rogue cabal inside the United States upon the American nation like Hitler's 'Operation Canned Goods' and the 'Reichstag fire'! For the latter definition of aiding and abetting, the ultimate in treason, she is silent. One imagines that like Noam Chomsky and Robert Fisk, she too believes that 19 Muslim jihadis, controlled by a man on a dialysis machine in the Hindu Kush and armed with laptops and cell phones, trumped the world's largest most sophisticated superpower into lowering its air defenses, into not following routine operational procedures, and suspended the laws of physics by demolishing the towers at free fall speed.
Ms. Edmonds is bizarrely mute on the empirical observation – which requires no interpreters or translators or intermediaries – that the towers collapsing into their own footprints is suspiciously similar to how buildings collapse under expert controlled demolition. Nor is she willing to opine on the logical implication of the highest levels of treason that would be involved in such a case if the empirical evidence of the eyes, years of engineering experience, and the rational mind are taken as the starting point of forensic analysis instead of the facile unproven theoretical expositions from the Pentagon and 'Popular Mechanics'. Indeed, she seems entirely fixated in her untiring efforts, to draw attention to, and elevate the threat from, the boogiemen 'pirates', who are now, in effect, made out to appear more real and less fictitious because real identifiable 'treasonous thugs' from within the US Government themselves sold the bad guys America's nuclear secrets for a song! (Sibel Edmonds' words, non-utterances, and omissions gleaned in only these references: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N as of 03/27/08)
Therefore, it is legitimate, it may be tortuously argued under certain ripe conditions, to nuclear decimate both Pakistan and Iran, in order to claim back America's stolen nuclear secrets that Ms. Edmonds is drawing attention to as an insider whistleblower. Especially if it's carried out in the guise of retaliatory-response to another even more horrendous 911 as President Bush himself prognosticated on February 13, 2008 is imminent: “terrorists are planning new attacks on our country ... that will make Sept. 11 pale by comparison”. Or even in response to another Gulf of Tonkin scenario that Congressman Ron Paul had prognosticated on January 15, 2007: “I am concerned, however, that a contrived Gulf of Tonkin- type incident may occur to gain popular support for an attack on Iran”. Or in response to perhaps an entirely different scenario that will appear so publicly shocking at the time of its occurrence that it would necessitate Martial Law in the United States, and hurriedly lead to nuclear 'retaliatory' “shock and awe” upon all pre-planned targets. That such reasons for nuclear retaliation and preemptive nuclear strikes are not far fetched is ominously foreshadowed in build-up statements from American military commanders such as this one reported in Pakistani newspaper Dawn on February 7, 2008: 'Defence officials told Congress on Wednesday that Al Qaeda is operating from havens in “under-governed regions” of Pakistan, which they said pose direct threats to Europe, the United States and the Pakistan government itself. ... Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, predicted in written testimony that the next attack on the United States probably would be launched by terrorists in that region.' More of such ominous statements building up the boogieman in the Hindu Kush can be gleaned in this open letter to a Pakistani General warning Pakistan's leaders that they are unwittingly (or perhaps deliberately) suiciding that country by continuing to engage in the American fiction of the 'War on Terror' which has made Pakistan “Terror Central, the “very petri dish of international terrorism”.
But it suffices to examine the above cited Adm. Michael Mullen's clairvoyance even with a modicum of one's own commonsense and a bit of un-indoctrinated rationalism.
“Next attack on the United States”? Is it so easy to attack a Goliath superpower isolated on a continent with a natural coastline from sea to shining sea and which spends trillions of dollars on its high-tech defense? Some barefoot mullahs with sticks and box cutters can so outwit the sole superpower and reduce it to such shambles that it has to enact draconian laws and deny its own civilians their own Constitutionally mandated Bill of Rights and Democratic existence? Then what's the point of all this defense spending if some “under-governed regions” of Pakistan can “pose direct threats to Europe, the United States”? Why not just take all that monies and put a roof over every man woman and child on the planet, provide everyone with clean drinking water, primary medical care, K-16 education, and lifetime livable-pension after retirement? And still have monies left over to build libraries, roads, and social services for all? That would most assuredly take the wind out of the sails of all terrorism – unless of course Daniel Pipes is to be believed, that it's not the peoples, but radical Islam and Islamism which is the enemy! That, it's "Not [even] a Clash of Civilizations, It's a Clash between the Civilized World and Barbarians". Even there, such genuine altruism and world-benefaction would surely eliminate the fertile recruiting grounds that are harvested through economic conscription and dead bodies created by the imperial bombings itself! Thus if despite this enormous defense spending, the American military-industrial complex failed to protect the Americans that they now cannot even disclose their true identities in most countries of the world, and often have to pretend that they are Canadians, shouldn't some peoples be demanding that the Pentagon be dismantled and its enormous kitchen-sink budget used for the good of the majority of the ordinary peoples of the United States?
Because these statements from the American President and his military commander can only be true at the 'unbirthday party' with the 'Mad Hatter' and the 'Dormouse' boisterously singing the war song “United We Stand”, it is not difficult to imagine the purpose of this facile charade of governmental secrecy behind Ms. Edmonds' travails. Indeed, these FBI recordings may become a tortuous setup to authenticate the supposed 'nuclear signature' of the fateful tipping point, wherein, nuclear attacks on targeted countries would finally be deemed acceptable by the public – when once, just contemplating its use was unimaginable because of the MAD deterrence that had kept the world precariously perched on the edge of Armageddon for 40 years. When the conditions are ripe, all of a sudden, Ms. Edmonds' wishes for Congressional inquiry may get granted! It will be determined that the nuclear signature of the terrorist event matched that of 'loose nukes' based on stolen American technology, hijacked from Pakistan by the Taliban and al-qaeeda, and squirreled into Iran and used by them to inflict shocking harm to the peoples and interests of the United States! For an outlandish scenario where this could plausibly be sold to the gullible American public no differently than the facile pretexts of WMDs to invade Iraq, see “Wakeup to the grotesque reality of the 'Grand Chessboard'”.
Beware of both, diabolically crafted, as well as inadvertently spun, endless trail of red herrings and dupes and patsies being made the pied pipers to hell. The 'technique of infamy' in its many variations is all pervasive in times of war, and this is, after all, 'World War IV', slated to last an entire lifetime! It will surely require highly inventive minds from 'Hollywood's script writers guild' to continually come up with increasingly compelling 'Alice in Wonderland' sequels to continue the pretexts for perpetual war! ...
End Excerpt
The above texts are self-explanatory. Sibel Edmonds is the white man's witting Trojan horse planted into dissent. And that is further demonstrated by the likes of whom she willingly associates with, and which kind of people are her exponents and supporters. I will just draw your attention to the name mentioned up-top: Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, who so generously anointed me: “you are a completely stupid fool, a disgrace to humanity” when I called his bullshit on Dec 06, 2008, that India's 26/11 was due to "Muslim Revolution": Rebuttal to Paul Craig Roberts': 'Washington Arrogance has Fomented a Muslim Revolution'. (Further factual discoveries of what really happened on 26/11 may be read here)
What more can I say!
Sibel Edmonds' face is beautifully plastered on her much heralded new book, and if the glowing Amazon reviews are an indication of popularity, she is evidently raking in the compensation for her specious narratives no differently than Noam Chomsky for his 9/11 booklet (see Noam Chomsky, Closet Capitalist by Peter Schweizer, 2006). While Noam Chomsky was suitably anointed with the epithet: “Arguably the most important intellectual alive”, by the empire's own mouthpiece, The New York Times, which not only helped sell his books but also afforded him mainstream credibility as dissent-chief extraordinaire, the new darling of Western dissent has been adorned with: “the most classified woman in U.S. History”, by Amazon to help sell hers and perform the same manufacturing of a celebrity function before the “crowd of simpletons and the credulous”. The Paul Newman Award, one can believe, is for her courageous and harrowing experience with the FBI, of course, but also for echoing the same core-lies of empire that 9/11 was an invasion from abroad! No awards were given to the late Eustace Mullins for his far more substantial dissent and significant real exposés of the Federal Reserve, nor to Ezra Pound who was locked away for life in St. Elizabeth for his real dissent with the American empire, and nor to Socrates who chose to drink the Hemlock instead. And as per Wikispooks' own disclosure concerning her website: “A partly free, partly pay for access website which takes a firmly establishment sceptic line.” Pay per access, indeed (!), and for what (?): to read the “firmly establishment sceptic line.” Some public service! Only in America --- where making money, fame, and shameless self-promotion on the blood of the 'untermenschen' has been raised to towering heights. Let the narrators of future history not neglect to mention this zenith of achievement of Western civilization among its highest and most lauded consciences.
To be fair, I have not read her book, nor followed her opinions since that second letter in 2008. That was nearly 7 years into 9/11. Now, in 2014, perhaps she is singing a different song --- I don't know --- one can never rule out metanoia. I read recently somewhere that even Noam Chomsky, ex post facto, way past the time of fait accompli, may have come around that 9/11 was not done by al-qaeeda (but I have not confirmed that with him directly). Who knows --- in 40-50 years, they will all be experiencing collective metanoia, happily revealing how the One-World Government was fashioned in the blood of the "useless eaters" of humanity. Then, the likes of Sibel Edmonds may even be given the Nobel Prize for history writing, or whatever is in vogue then, for more truthfully revealing it all so that even sixth graders can remorselessly read about it in their history books. Just as they do today about how the American continent was settled.
If ever the predictions made in my letter come true and Sibel Edmonds' “whistleblowing” is used for fashioning justifications to launch invasions of other nations, the blood of my peoples will equally be shared by Sibel Edmonds with all the rest of vulgar propagandists who have maintained the core lies of empire. I have little sympathy for any ex post facto claims of having been “ignorant of knowledge” --- especially when it is public knowledge easily accessible to anyone. If one is unable to add two plus two but leads in making the public mind as a surrogate of the Mighty Wurlitzer, one is a propagandist. Referring back to Nuremberg Military Tribunals, justice Robert H. Jackson had even set the legal precedent for international law when he eviscerated all Shakespearean claims of the Nazi leadership of their being ignorant of the real facts of the matter underlying Hitler's imperial mobilization: “The plans of Adolf Hitler for aggression were just as secret as Mein Kampf, of which over six million copies were published in Germany.”
Thank you
Zahir Ebrahim

Published February 19, 2014, 08:00 pm | Last updated on February 20, 2014, 05:55 pm 5381

How Manufactured Dissent contributes to War Crimes – Sibel Edmonds Revisited By Zahir Ebrahim