2009-06-03 Project Expose MSM Reports
<hide> <let name=data index=Date>2009-06-03</let> <let name=data index=Author>Sibel Edmonds</let> <let name=data index=Source>Project Expose MSM</let> <let name=data index=Topics>\Newsweek\mainstream media\Federal Bureau of Investigation\Michael Isikoff\FBI Language Division</let> <let name=data index=URL>http://123realchange.blogspot.com/2009/06/project-expose-msm-reports.html</let> <let name=data index=Title>Project Expose MSM Reports</let> <let name=data index=TitlePlain>Project Expose MSM Reports</let>
<let name=data index=Text>
One evening, about a week before the publication of Mr. Isikoff's piece, I met with him, as a source, in the Mayflower Hotel's lounge area. I had a witness in the background to observe the meeting. During the hour-long meeting I provided him with information regarding the FBI Language Division, and gave him names of witnesses and sources who were willing to meet with him and corroborate the information I had given him. At the time, some of the sources were willing to do so on-the-record: FBI Operations Director John Cole, FBI LS Behrooz Sarshar & Amin Neshati, and certain Senate staff members involved in the investigation of my reports; while others would have done so 'anonymously' due to fear of protecting their employment. I also made his job easier by giving him relevant Congressional, IG, and legal public documents, reports, and references. Of course all the previous press coverage of these issues, and the case itself, was available to him in any news archive or online.
I know Mr. Isikoff was well aware of the facts and points cited above. I had given him information, documents and sources that were 100% relevant and central to his upcoming story. I am certain he had access to other official documents and statements as well -- all available in public records.
Despite that, Mr. Isikoff's story instead advanced the FBI's already-discredited point of view that the FBI's Translation Division's problems could be summed up as a 'shortage.' The article completely ignored and omitted established cases, problems, and severe weaknesses in the FBI's background security check of applicant translators, security measures in preventing espionage and security breaches, and quality control for translated work.
Article cites many other pieces of relevant information made explicitly aviailable to Mr. Isikoff, and concludes:
Suffice it to say that during the last eight years, throughout many outrageous gag orders, draconian uses of the State Secrets Privilege, Court Closings, Vindicating IG & Congressional Reports, Newsweek has consistently maintained one position: Blackout every fact of this particular case. You may check it out yourself by searching their archives. Your search result will come back as '0.'
I would like to know why; wouldn't you?
We attempted to contact Mr. Isikoff twice. To our second request he replied via email:
- sorry. No comment.
Despite several notices over the last week, submitted through their website's "Contact Us" page, we received no reply to our requests for comment from any Newsweek editor(s).
<let name=data index=TextShort>“Mr. Isikoff's story [in Newsweek] instead advanced the FBI's already-discredited point of view that the FBI's Translation Division's problems could be summed up as a 'shortage.' The article completely ignored and omitted established cases, problems, and severe weaknesses in the FBI's background security check of applicant translators, security measures in preventing espionage and security breaches, and quality control for translated work.”</let> </hide><if not flag=$including><let name=docat val=1 /><call ShowLinkData /></if>