Podcast Show #1


The Boiling Frogs Presents James Bamford

BFP Podcast logo

James Bamford discusses the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program, the ties between NSA and the nation’s telecommunications companies including the Israeli companies involved in intercepting highly sensitive communications for the U.S. government, the agency’s failings pre-9/11 and the relevant information blackout by the 9/11 Commission, the US mainstream media, President Obama’s ‘no change’ so far, and more.


James Bamford is one of the country's leading writers on intelligence and national security issues. His books include "The Puzzle Palace,” "Body of Secrets," "A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq and the Abuse of America's Intelligence Agencies," and most recentlyThe Shadow Factory”. Mr. Bamford coproduced NOVA's “The Spy Factory”, which was based on his latest book. He has written for many magazines, including investigative cover stories for The New York Times Magazine, The Washington Post Magazine and The Los Angeles Times Magazine, and is a contributing writer for Rolling Stone. His 2005 Rolling Stone article “The Man Who Sold the War” won a National Magazine Award for reporting. He also spent a decade as the Washington investigative producer for the ABC News program, World News Tonight with Peter Jennings, and taught at the University of California, Berkeley, as a distinguished visiting professor.

Here is our guest James Bamford unplugged!

***Subscribing Members must be logged in to listen to the audio


FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.

Comments

  1. You are off to a great start with this program Sibel.

    There was enough time alloted for the discussion to gain depth.

    I look forward to the next installment.

    Thanks,
    Dennis

  2. Anonymous says:

    Just finished listening. Great job both of you Peter & Sibel. I'll order Bamford's latest book. He is a gem.

    Your program will shine among crappy stuff out there!

  3. ConScope says:

    An outstanding interview!
    Looking forward to future episodes.

  4. Ishmael says:

    great interview. What shouldn't have surprised me was the revelation that Israeli security companies with ties to their version of the NSA had implemented the construction and operation of the NSA secret rooms among other countries and demonstrated better intelligence gathering capbilities than the Australian Government. It reminds me of a guy I knew in the Bay area who had worked for Deutsche Bundespost running a piece of the Saudi telecom system. He also showed me his Israeli passport and an uncashed check for $28 from the Israeli Defense Force. What better way to have access to intelligence than in the surveillance complex.

    That note also reminded me of a couple of pieces that came out peripherally on the Minot/Barksdale Nuclear Bent Spear, where six fully-armed nuclear cruise missles were removed from their secure, alarmed facility, loaded onto a B-52 in Minot, flown across the country and left sitting unguarded on the Barksdale tarmac for over 24 hours.

    It seems that much of the nuclear weapons storage depot perimeter security for the Air Force was also designed, built and operated by Israeli defense contractors. I'll have to do some digging for the relevant articles but will try to post the links in the next few days. An auspicious beginning. Bonne Chance.

  5. Anonymous says:

    If al Qaeda was as truly dangerous as US intel claimed then why were al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar free to roam the US for 20 months?

    NSA:

    1) Hayden was involved in pre-9/11 warrantless surveillance programs.

    NSA Domestic Surveillance Began 7 Months Before 9/11, Convicted Qwest CEO Claims

    Qwest CEO Not Alone in Alleging NSA Started Domestic Phone Record Program 7 Months Before 9/11

    2) Hayden failed to use FISA. Evidently his excuse was concern about civil liberties. This of course makes no sense at all because FISA was created to adress civil liberty concerns and the pre-9/11 warrantless surveillance programs were obviously in gross violation of civil liberties.

    3) The NSA failed to inform the CIA and FBI even though they asked to be told about Yemen hub communications.

    4) After 9/11, Hayden kept his job while helping to further implement warrantless surveillance programs. He later received promotions to DDNI and CIA Director. As CIA Director he opposed the declassification of the CIA IG 9/11 report (the full report is still classified) claiming it would “consume time and attention revisiting ground that is already well plowed” and distract the CIA from the WoT. He also supported the torture program and launched an investigation of CIA IG Helgerson.

    CIA:

    Scheuer needs to get his story straight. Either Alec Station was concerned about al Qaeda or they weren't. The withholding of information about al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar continued after they were linked to USS Cole suspects. Lawrence Wright notes in his book (The Looming Tower) that the Gorelick wall excuses were without merit. One, the 1998 indictment of Bin Laden gave the FBI the legal authority to surveil al Qaeda operatives. Two, FBI criminal side agents investigated the Cole bombing. They were not told that the NSA and CIA were aware of a January 5-8, 2000 al Qaeda meeting in Malaysia. FBI suspects in the Cole bombing (i.e. Khallad bin Attash, Rahim al-Nashiri) attended the meeting along with al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar. Wright also wrote the New Yorker story about FBI agent Ali Soufan who repeatedly asked the CIA for information during his investigation but was told they had nothing to share. This is why Wright wrote that CIA withholding of information was tantamount to obstruction of justice.

    FBI:

    Scheuer said in a interview that the CIA didn't share the information because they couldn't trust FBI computer systems. What about secure line telephones? Face to face meetings? The main problem with Scheuer's explanation is that the information about al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar was shared in late August of '01. The problem was that the information wasn't given to criminal side agents. Instead the FBI UBLU (intel side Bin Laden unit) tasked a rookie agent to do a search. Based on public information it also appears that UBLU agents knew that al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar were in the US for quite some time (well before the information was officially shared).

    Coleen Rowley has described the bizarre conduct of another intel side unit (RFU) that obstructed the Moussaoui investigation.

    AFAIK, the chiefs of CIA's Alec Station (Rich B.), the UBLU (Rod Middleton) and the RFU (Dave Frasca) have never been interviewed by US media. It should be noted that the chief of Alec Station from mid-'99 until 12/01 (at which time he was promoted to chief of the reopened Kabul station) was Rich B. (Sheuer's ID was classified until he was permitted to go public to promote his books). One would think these officials would be able to clear up a lot of confusion. And despite the fact that the 9/11 Commission turned over their records to NARA in '04 the MFR (summary of interviews) for each of these officials is pending classification review. In fact, I'm not sure if the 9/11 Commission even interviewed Frasca or Middleton.

    Where was the good faith?

  6. Metemneurosis says:

    Great job Sibel. Great choice of intro music. I was aware of Comverse/Verint and they were the first thing that occurred to me when you wrote you piece for Brad blog speculating on whether some congressmen were being blackmailed. When we consider that angle and all the Mossad agents arrested after 911 – some of whom were reported to be living within close range of all the various cells of hijackers – and add to that the secret offices created within both Israel and the US (the Office of Special Plans and it's counter-part in Israel under Sharon), so many of the neocons either having close ties to Israel or being dual Isreali citizens it all begins to look very suspicious. Also it's interesting to take into account the fact that when good agents tried to investigate so many things related to 911 including Comverse they were shut down from above. And the fact the Cameron reported for Fox that some under investigation related to 911 changed their communication practices as soon as wiretaps were put in place. He even said that there was a highly secretive investigation into connections with the Israeli government over that very issue.

    I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist but it does begin to sound like we have some group of people (and I tend to think they're not some monolithic group but also have internal tensions) that are operating outside the normal parameters of even our secretive intelligence agencies.

    (If this comment doesn't get me on the watch list I'm going to be disappointed.)

  7. Edit_Mommies says:

    Finally some feedback! The suspense almost got the better of me. According to Tim Burton's Coraline, American kids are predisposed to making correction's. Affirming guidance without the inception of unresolved residual loathing is an automatic response! It appears the incubation period necessary for cultivating actual responsibility cannot be avoided when a child executes critical thinking. Powerfully pervasive parameters secure healing and growth! Success lies in securing innocence as a critical neglect for the emotionally regressed! Children as young as 10 will adamantly kill messengers utilizing a very similar coping mechanism as their parasitic captors. These children will almost definitely ween their bashful, dumb fucking audience, Off of mathematical impulse! Imagine the shrinking gap of reasoning deflating the omissions of their pathetic rulers! Underdeveloped systems will no longer enact reciprocal testimony like interlocking PGP Keys! Great! The forefront of electronic mail is finally considered our weaker class!

  8. Ishmael says:

    Anonymous, Qwest was doing projects for the NSA as far back as 1998 in LA as I had to undergo a BI for it. So their hands are hardly clean.This was BEFORE their acquisition of US West when they were still an inter-exchange carrier. Also remember that, in the entire history of the FISA courts, they only denied the government wiretaps twice.

  9. Hannah K. O'Luthon says:

    Is there any possibility of a transcript of the Bamford (and subsequent) broadcasts? I'm sure that this is not a high priority (and probably should not be), but I would be very grateful to have a text version of the interview.

    I find it amazing that the sort of information mentioned by Metemneurosis above has never reached the collective consciousness of the American
    electorate: I'm sure, in contrast, that public officials are very well aware of the situation. Just ask Bill Clinton, Elliot Spitzer, or Jim McGreevey, among many others. I further suspect that the behavior of those, like Metemneurosis, who raise such discomforting questions is indeed noted, but judged too ineffectual to necessitate further action.

  10. Anonymous says:

    It was a good first attempt by Sibel. I now know how to pronounce her name. The information about Varint was very helpful. Wayne Madsen has followed this for years, but his anti-Jewish bias makes it difficult reading. Also, I guess in deference to James Bamford, Peter Lance was not referenced, but his investigative journalism was far more detailed. Since the first reference to 'Triple Cross' on this blog, why has he not been mentioned more? When will you have Peter on your show?
    I have to be the voice of dissent here: Nazi's rose to power by making the Jewish people scapegoats. This blog has the tendency to do the very same, by deleting comments that offer fair and balanced. I specifically am referring to comments that I made earlier about the difference between Khazar, Askenazi, and Sephardic Jews.
    Since even intelligent people tend to react on emotional gut levels, I will offer an anecdotal insight. We all want to be the most intelligent – especially in this crew. It is frustrating to meet a really smart Jewish person and find they can eat more ice cream, grasp organic chemistry better, or raise so many successful children. Everybody has their gift, why let your emotions rule on such a deep issue?

    Simon

  11. Wouldn't the NSA have plenty of recordings concerning any acts of treason involving 9.11?

  12. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Simon: Peter Lance is scheduled to be interviewed next week. Since currently I can manage posting only 2 interviews per month it won't be out until mid to end of September. As for your other comments: I have no idea what you are saying. If you wrote something not relevant to our discussion topic, or, if you sounded like a propoganda machine, or, plain nonsense, then yes,as I'd mentioned many times: those comments will be deleted. If your purpose is only to express yourself with disregard to what we are doing here, then, start your own site/blog; no one will delete you there.

    Paul: I am sure they do.

    Hannah: You are more than welcome to transcribe the show. I will provide a link to it.

    Dennis: Thank you; also thank you for your recent thoughts and suggestions in your e-mail.

    Ishmael: Excellent reminder/point. Also, "in the entire history of the FISA courts, they only denied the government wiretaps twice." Even the civil liberties experts fail to see/understand this.

  13. Kingfisher says:

    @Metemneurosis,
    "I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist but it does begin to sound like we have some group of people (and I tend to think they're not some monolithic group but also have internal tensions) that are operating outside the normal parameters of even our secretive intelligence agencies."

    If you are a conspiracy theorist then you are in some good company. But I would look more at elected officials and appointees than at career defense / intel people. This is why I said Robert Baer would be a fantastic guest for this show; he has stated similar things and I find him very credible. In fact he even published a novel called Blow the House Down which he used to explore an alternative narrative to 9/11 (hint: he is restricted in what he publishes in non-fiction, not as fiction). I have seen few people in the “9/11 Truth Movement” even mention this book; he serves some gold here, but these truthers are so consumed in their own self importance it escapes them.

  14. Kingfisher says:

    @Sibel,
    Can I pass along some questions or subtopics for Peter to you?

  15. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Kinfisher: Certainly, and that goes for others too. You can submit suggestions/questions and I will try to cover them, or at least take it into consideration for the interview.

    We'll also have Phil Giraldi (on AIPAC, Harman, Franklin, and more.

  16. Metemneurosis says:

    I'd like to hear Giraldi's list of people he speculates might be 'mega'. He said he had narrowed it down to about 6. But I'd understand if he was hesitant to name them.

  17. Excellent show, Sibel! Looking forward to more. I'll archive the audio and pass it along in my community.

    @Kingfisher: Aren't you part of the "9/11 Truth Movement"?

  18. Edit_Mommies says:

    More please would of been acceptable. Boiling Frogs is a very optimistic title if not a declaration of accomplishment and reassurance. I fear that when I help your topic grow you can only fall back into a blinding age of you're own personal sunrise. When our flesh is a mere trap our privacy is disregard for what we already know. Freedom is only secure when unity allows critical allowances as our backbone and reassurance. "We have the fuckers!" That it what this titles means to me. Even if the pot drops and we are reminded of the optimism contained in every dying possibility you reinforce with negativity…and Yes I will listen to your Podcast once again, Thank You..

  19. @Edit_Mommies: I like your take on Boiling Frogs and the agressive stance towards the culprits. And I can't understand most of what you write. Each sentence offers a blast of choices and seems to blur focus just in time to leap to another lillypad. Not that it's your fault, of course. I'll keep trying…

  20. @Kingfisher: BTW, I searched 911blogger.com and found many pages of links to blog posts with quotes of Baer, interactions with him and We Are Change members, and references to his books.

  21. Edit_Mommies says:

    Thank You Zica, I didn't even need Rap music to get some fricken respect!

  22. Kingfisher says:

    @Zica,
    Yes, Baer’s We Are Change video is fantastic on several levels. The first level he confirms many things: the white van, Elgindy, Iran, etc. The second level is great because it shows how ridiculous the 9/11 truth movement can be. Here Baer is serving up absolute gold and the interviewer starts going after him with his infantile theories about war games:

    WeAreChange Guy: “they weren’t the ones who were able to guide planes into the…”

    Baer: [Sighs, rolls head] “Abu Zubaydah, one of the key guys called (Prince) Bandar in Aspen, right up until the Tenth of September…..then started calling him again on the sixteenth.”

    WeAreChange Guy: “What does that have to do with these military war games that were completely memetic of the 9/11 operation?…”

    Absolutely ridiculous! This dude is so wrapped up in his pet theory, that HE KNOWS the truth; that anything incongruent with or threatening too his personal reality is treated with hostility.

    No, I do not consider myself a member of the 9/11 Truth Movement. I think that, and have been told by those who know, that there is more to the official version; but I belong to no movement. And Flight 77 most definitely hit the Pentagon.

  23. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Kingfisher: Agreed. I have a list of honorable agents/people from relevant agencies who have come out to publicly challenge the ridiculous gov and 9/11 Commission reports…There are those 9/11 family members who truly worked (and some still do) to get to the truth, there are reporters (such as Bamford) who come out and put forth solid facts challenging the official lines/excuses, and there are many solid citizens who've been seeking and fighting for 'real' answers and accountability.

    Then, there are those who are just plain ridiculous. All they do: discredit everything. Are these people real? Are they engaged in false flag operations? Are they just plain crazy? I don't know…

  24. @Kingfisher and Sibel: I disagree that you are not part of the 9/11 Truth Movement, just as much as anyone who thinks there's more to the story than we have been told. Can you consider a cover up of the "more" in a story to be a lie? I never signed up for a card either and I'm sure I wouldn't if I was offered one.

    There are those that discredit everything and are ridiculous, and many say they are "truthers". I think many are false-flag. Many are also those who can't process the cognitive disonnance associated with those in "our" government doing anything against the best interests of the citizens. Those are the ones who least care about the NSA spying on us.

    As for 'real' answers, do either of you consider the recent developments concerning scientific evidence of un-exploded nano-thermite to be a valid vein of inquiry? Are those that consider Bld 7 a probable controlled demolition nutty and unrealistic?

  25. I enjoyed listening to the show… keep on keeping on !

    One more strong indication of the police state is to suppress dissent.
    The 9th court of appeals in San Francisco just ruled against protection of public employee whistleblower protection based on the 2006 supreme court decision.
    Go to http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/21/BA3818SK34.DTL
    to red it and weep.

  26. Metemneurosis says:

    @Zica I'm not endorsing the nano-thermite story nor am I knocking it, but if you're interested you should listen to this.

    http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2009/07/deadly_dust.html

    As someone pointed out, though, even if it were true that they found it in the dust the dust they got it from was stuff some woman had saved in her house for years. As such in a court of law the theory would be shot to hell because any opposing counsel would question the whether it had been tampered with in the mean time. It couldn't be used to prove anything unfortunately. But on the other hand it wouldn't really need to, since it would never, in my opinion, get to a court anyway. It'd just be more evidence on the scale of public opinion (or rather on the scale of a tiny minority of the public's opinion). I'm suspending judgment so far. But it's interesting.

  27. Thanks, Metemneurosis. I'm downloading the mp3 now and will take a listen. BTW, the USGS has dust and has found the iron-rich microspheres that, as some have said, are created from surface tension on molten metal.

  28. Kingfisher says:

    I do not take controlled demolition theories very seriously; with regard to ‘real answers’, the hard science stuff about the Twin Towers collapse would not be what I would look into. Though, Bob Baer keeps vaguely mentioning methyl nitrate; that would be something I would follow up on.

  29. Metemneurosis says:

    Yeah I've heard about the microspheres. Unfortunately you'd either need to be an engineer or a metallurgist or know some open minded ones that you trusted to be able to work out the plausibility of the different stories about this stuff. Some people claim that NIST says (I haven't checked myself) that they were expecting the microspheres with those chemical signatures but that they came from completely normal materials in the buildings like computer monitors etc. I just have no idea myself, not being skilled in chemistry and not having the time to try and look into the various things involved and see if it was even close to being something I could plausibly form an educated guess about.

    There are also some people who say that the experiments that supposedly established the nano-thermite were flawed. Some claim the solution the stuff was dissolved in is known to interact with the materials and could have biased the results. Of course even if the expirements were perfectly good there would plausibly be attempts to discredit it. How do you tell which is which? I just have know way of knowing which is more plausible.

    All in all I try to look for trustworthiness of source, sometime going who they associate with (though admittedly not the best criterion), and convergence of info on a plausible theory. It's the best I can do as of now.

  30. Edit_Mommies says:

    @SIbel

    It's more like we forget to remember. Some say most of us are obsessed with a balancing act focusing and cleansing our minds. Determining whether the compulsion drawing Americans towards sacrifice as crazy or not is leverage. Teamwork does not involve paranoid comparisons and gambled affections conjuring disability. I just want to ensure everyone is emotionally grown and we are not allowing pecking orders to take place. Every neighborhood powerful and free.

    July 23, 2009 2:55 AM

  31. I haven't seen NIST explain the iron-rich microspheres, but maybe they have attempted to do so.

    The red/gray chips which were analyzed to contain uniform nano sized particles which had the make up of thermite and were explosive when heated. The size and uniformity were said to not be achievable, except by specialists in nano-technology. They were said not to be able to be created by mistake (using the wrong solution or whatnot).

    I'm concerned about this possibility and I take it seriously. I'd like to see the topic covered in mainstream scientific journals. Harrit and others published in the open access journal with peer review. Their results were supposedly independently verified. There has been concern over the validity of the journal as well as the paper, after a the editor resigned, saying she thought the paper was nonsense, but that she couldn't review it (she aparently didn't know it was going to be published). I haven't heard of anyone publishing a peer-reviewed scientific response to the claims.

    It has to do with the difference between the scientific process and journalism. In science, claims can be verified or knocked down by other scientists, no matter who they associate with.

  32. (Corrected link)

    Another aspect of the nano-thermite. There aren't many places that can create it(military), so it'd be nearly impossible to spike the dust with it.

    Here's a link to that paper, in case anyone would like to take a look.

    Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe [The Open Chemical Physics Journal]

    NIST's final report on Building 7, not one of the twin towers, says that the building came down from office fires. They say global collapse was not influenced by either the damage from the falling towers nor the fuel stored in the building.

    Office fires.

    It's a shame they didn't look for it, as they might have been good at that:

    The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites by Kevin Ryan (a whistleblower)

  33. Imhotep says:

    As my blogger handle suggests I am an experienced and very technically minded architect.
    I recently listened to a presentation by the lead WTC forensic engineering company who presented their observations and conclusions. Their conclusion was that the heat from the jet fuel fire made spaghetti out of the unprotected open web steel joists that supported the poured concrete floors. The affected flooring then collapsed not only the floor but the whole building at free-fall speeds.

    During Q&A I asked him how two or three partially collapsing floors could collapse the whole building, especially with over 50 large protected steel columns at the core and hundreds at the perimeter.
    The question went unanswered.

    It is a known fact that only three hirise buildings in history have completely collapsed due to fire… WTC 1, WTC 2 and WTC 7.

    Anyone who looks at the building collapses in slow motion can see that the core columns were taken out by seeing the WTC 1 & WTC 2 radio masts sink into the structure first.

    Additionally building 7 had a puddle of molten metal observed in the foundation days after it fell. That's really extremely hot and highly likely the result of thermite.

    My professional opinion is that these buildings were taken down. The initial crime was that thousands died when it was done. Hundreds have died since from the heavy metals and other toxic materials the collapse put into the local atmosphere. And then there are the official coverups.

    This touches Sibel with the story of Douglas Feith personally releasing the six Israelis held in custody after being observed dancing in delight on top of a panel truck in NYC while watching the towers fall. He got them to a plane and blocked all attempts to interview them by the FBI. Treason in my book.

  34. Anonymous says:

    If any have read 'Triple Cross', Peter Lance does not make a big issue of the Twin Towers or the mechanics of their collapse. For a number of reasons, this becomes a distraction put up by false flaggers. The real point that Lance develops in great detail suggests that either FBI/CIA or both are seriously dysfunctional. The 'wall' put in place by Jamie Gorelick was discredited by Lance in numerous instances. What becomes the real question is whether it was incompetency or 'orders from above' that led to 9-11. If al Qaeda is was a tightly run ship with Mohammed Ali the stool of U.S. government/corporate policy, then manipulating them becomes a much easier task, than if they were a loosely organized jihad.
    BTW edit_mommies is as entertaining as Jamol and court jesters have an important role in feudal societies. Right on dude.

    Simon

  35. Sibel Edmonds says:

    I appreciate the heated discussion, however, this is getting outside the topic posted: Bamford Interview-NSA, involved Israeli companies, specific related issues blacked out by the commission…

    There are thousands of forums out there to discuss the topics of your last 10 or so comments; please go there and discuss it as long as you want. Do this as respect for this site, Mr. Bamford's interview, and others who visit this site. Otherwise I have to delete comments…

    Thank you.

  36. Sure thing, Sibel. Sorry for the distraction from the interview.

    A couple last questions about the topic as related to your site and to Boiling Frogs:

    1) Is the topic of scientific evidence of explosives used in the destruction of the WTC going to be a no-no on this site for good?

    2) Would you consider having Kevin Ryan (a govt whistleblower) as a guest on Boiling Frogs in the future?

    Thanks!

  37. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Zica:
    the first question: For now, yes. This site is focused on the MSM, macro issues such as our civil liberties, secrecy…Because of various groups who have blended with the 9/11 cause bringing in disrespectful, irrational, and simply nonsense attitude I chose to distance myself from the entire topic 2 years ago. This is the case also with several dozens credible government intel/law enforcement WBs, 9/11 family members, and solid independent journalists I know. It is unfortunate, but it's the reality. It's a free Internet blog world. There are 1000s of sites dedicated to various speculations/theories; which is fine. People can go there and talk about it as much as they want. They don't belong here, and I don't want to get distracted by theory/speculation overload; neither do I want to take away from solid discussions/comments posted by those I respect. This is the last time I am writing about this.

    Question2: I don't know who he is. So far I have 10 people booked, and that takes care of the next 3-4 months. We'll discuss the next series when the time comes.

  38. Hello again Sibel,

    Excellent program. An auspicious beginnning, to be sure. Very glad to hear one of my very favourite songs, "Everybody Knows", for the opening.

    Aside from the content, I was personally a little disappointed by the technical quality of your own voice connection. I don't know if it was a data line or perhaps a cell phone, but, guest James Bamford's connection was much better (clear and stable) than your own. Aside from the "tinny" sound, especially near the end of the show, you were fading in and out so much during your final remarks that I missed several of them entirely. If you can't actually be in the studio, perhaps using the same telecom mode (landline?) that Mr Bamford used, if possible, would help to address that issue somehwat. Personally, I want to hear your voice crystal clear on mic in the studio!

  39. PS ~ Peter Lance! I can't wait!

  40. Sibel Edmonds says:

    bh: You are Right. It is partly due to my habit of moving my head too much; partly my connection…Eventually I want to offer the show weekly or even more frequently than that…Of course, I'd love to be able to have access to studio. For all that to happen: 1- we need to increase the site traffic and the following; 2- secure funding…Hopefully we'll get there; any help in increasing the site traffic will be greatly appreciated.

    'Leo Cohen': same here; I'm a big fan, picked my two favorite songs (I listen to it regularly; helps me focus;-), and Peter loved the idea of having those two songs for our show.

    Edit_Mommies: It is OK to talk in allegories & codes or whatever, but please don't use that language; it is beneath you and others. Thank you.

  41. Anonymous says:

    I agree Sibel. This site is intended for fact finding purposes. It is her site and please respect that. She, has and continues to do what others will not. Try dragging a charged 2 inch hose into a burning building yourself. Water weigh about 8 pounds per gallon. Its a heavy load and circumstances require our support. Thank you and good job Sibel and Family. I know what its like to drag that hose alone, and a thousand gallons goes only so far. Let Sibel do her work and listen.

  42. Edit_Mommies says:

    I thought that word was what they wanted. Then if you're not being fussy, I will quit. Well a lot of this Surveillance is being used as an example of teamwork or efficiency. My example was the Cameras, at the traffic intersections. Why should we have to be secretive at an intersection? It would seem simple enough of an operation driving through an intersection. You really have nothing to gain. Maybe if you are made sick an intersection offers more fixtures for which to tantalize your disease. Maybe an ashes, ashes we all fall down attitude should not be saved for the bed. Sorry about the code werds? I guess these are just symptoms of perpetual defeat and pessimism attracting wealth through the focal reliance of an aimed gun. I was like, "Oh no!" "Babies crying." *pow* *pow* *pow*

  43. Anonymous says:

    Thanks for this radio feed. Listening to discussion on these matters live is good stuff . The Israeli involvement in information technology continues to ring deep bells. PTECH and such. Very good seeing the discussion on 911 ebb and flow. Nice to read your views on the matter Sibel. It clears it up abit.
    .
    To the point.
    James Bamford stated the terrorists involved in the attacks actually meet in conference [taking over a hotel? three hotels? for the week?] mere blocks away from the HQ of NSA. He said while NSA was meeting in their 'hunt' for the terrorists, the' terrorists' were meeting blocks away planning for the attacks.At the same time!? OK. 9/11 is more or less taboo, I get that, but referencing the Bamford interview, It is or was assumed in the broadcast the two events were not connected.. Certainly I was left with the idea there was no connection. Having no hard data to corroborate the intentions of either group, the question of whether or not the schedule entertained other possibilities is open, surely. NSA does not talk. ATTA does not talk. connections have been made regarding alleged hi-jackers having military ties .drivers license addresses : officer training schools etcetc within USA, but, those among us happy with co-incidence theory completely accept it as not connected. A chance or a choice made that has no connection.

    However, those of us of the half full variety immediately smell a rat. That a major terrorist organization evolving a plan of this dimension NOT to know they were meeting blocks away from NSA HQ defies imagination.
    My question would be. has anything arisen to indicate possible reasons for that coincidence having taken place?
    rogermorris

  44. Anonymous says:

    Thanks for this radio feed. Listening to discussion on these matters live is good stuff . The Israeli involvement in information technology continues to ring deep bells. PTECH and such. Very good seeing the discussion on 911 ebb and flow. Nice to read your views on the matter Sibel. It clears it up abit.
    .
    To the point.
    James Bamford stated the terrorists involved in the attacks actually meet in conference [taking over a hotel? three hotels? for the week?] mere blocks away from the HQ of NSA. He said while NSA was meeting in their 'hunt' for the terrorists, the' terrorists' were meeting blocks away planning for the attacks.At the same time!? OK. 9/11 is more or less taboo, I get that, but referencing the Bamford interview, It is or was assumed in the broadcast the two events were not connected.. Certainly I was left with the idea there was no connection. Having no hard data to corroborate the intentions of either group, the question of whether or not the schedule entertained other possibilities is open, surely. NSA does not talk. ATTA does not talk. connections have been made regarding alleged hi-jackers having military ties .drivers license addresses : officer training schools etcetc within USA, but, those among us happy with co-incidence theory completely accept it as not connected. A chance or a choice made that has no connection.

    However, those of us of the half full variety immediately smell a rat. That a major terrorist organization evolving a plan of this dimension NOT to know they were meeting blocks away from NSA HQ defies imagination.
    My question would be. has anything arisen to indicate possible reasons for that coincidence having taken place?
    rogermorris

  45. Ok Sibel,

    Fine. Here's the deal: I brought it up, so, it's my responsibility to solve it. As it happens, I went to school for electronics engineering and worked in the audio recording and broadcast industry in the 1980's. Computers have changed, but, the old cliche still applies, (pardon me) "you can't shine sh*te". In plain English that means you can't start with a poor quality product (or signal) and make it sound "good". In your case this boils down to a half-decent microphone, maybe a little software (a relatively small investment), and a little time spent sorting your technique with Peter.

    It really doesn't have to be a $1000 Sennheiser studio mic, chances are an item from Radio Shack will be infintely better than whatever you used last week.

    Now, I simply Googled "remote audio studio" and found several excellent links to 'step by step' instructions for setting up a remote home studio for podcasting at a very small investment. Here is one that I think may be especially helpful for you to create a professional quality remote studio link for podcasting:

    http://odeo.com/episodes/23139994-Remote-Studio-Audio-Marketing-Online-Live-68

    Sibel, this is your blog. You are representing your brand, your cause, your name and yourself with this program. Your reputation and all that implies are on the line. I understand you have your hands full with Ela, but, there is simply no excuse.

    And don't cry poverty to me. I don't take that crap from my people or myself, I'm certainly not going to take it from the queen of "where there's a will there's a way". If you're a technophobe or aren't technically inclined or truly can't afford a microphone, I will donate one from my closet and help talk you through the entire process. (I find it difficult to believe that Pete didn't.)

    With best regards. 😉

  46. Sibel Edmonds says:

    Bh: "Here is one that I think may be especially helpful for you to create a professional quality remote studio link for podcasting:

    http://odeo.com/episodes/23139994-Remote-Studio-Audio-Marketing-Online-Live-68"

    I call this constructive criticism; a bit hard, but constructive nonetheless. I like people who go beyond stating problems…

    I am going to check out the link, and do my best to set this up, and improve the quality.

    We already have the next 3 interviews wrapped up, and 2 more scheduled for this coming week, since I'll be away from Aug 8 until Sep 3 (Far and away; NZ), so be patient. You may not see the improvement immediately.

    "the queen of "where there's a will there's a way".": Is that really me?! Complement, indeed.
    Thank you, and hope you'll stay on top of this blog's performance:-)

  47. Kingfisher says:

    "However, those of us of the half full variety immediately smell a rat. That a major terrorist organization evolving a plan of this dimension NOT to know they were meeting blocks away from NSA HQ defies imagination.
    My question would be. has anything arisen to indicate possible reasons for that coincidence having taken place?"

    This is another pet peeve of mine about 9/11 Truthers: they lack of knowledge about national security matters to even make a good conspiracy theory.

    NSA is a cryptologic intelligence agency; they do not do human intelligence or run paramilitary operations, they do not have the capacity. I’ll pretend to go along here: say there was a nefarious plot by the government; the NSA would not be the people handling the hijackers.

    Further, pretending there was a big nefarious government conspiracy here; even if the NSA was or was not handling the hijackers in this hypothetical situation, why the hell would they meet with the hijackers blocks away from NSA hq? Ridiculous.

  48. The only reason I said anything about 9/11 was because Kingfisher started dogging "truthers".

    Please stop using that word in a derogatory way, or I'll need to keep reminding you that you are one.

    You're continuing the efforts to create a rift, so that even Sibel Edmonds won't touch the topic anymore.

    Hopefully, she won't stop accepting other topics, like not voting for the least worse, if they get too hot tempered, ignorant, ridiculous, whatever. That's just the goal of the people who never wanted us to talk about them in the first place. And they're usually the ones, on blogs and in the MSM, who start calling names.

  49. Kingfisher says:

    @Zica,
    It would be one thing to say I made too much of a generalization (which I probably did). But to say that I am “continuing the efforts to create a rift, so that even Sibel Edmonds won't touch the topic anymore” is ridiculous. I can’t speak for Sibel, but my hunch is that she won’t touch the topic because she thinks most of it is silly. Placing James Bamford and Sibel in the same group as people who think a missile hit the Pentagon is an insult, and does a disservice to both.

    Here is the rift: what I am saying is incongruent with or threatening to your personal reality. My calling out pathologies that I believe to be endemic to the 9/11 Truth Movement, can’t have merit to it can it? It must be derogatory name calling!

    Obviously you are an intelligence and passionate person; but, as with what happens with “movements”, group dynamics have taken an adverse effect on you.

  50. I also call out pathologies related to 9/11 Truth, as I have done to previous posts on this site. I try to go towards the content of a post, not towards the "truth movement". We all have a stake in the truth.

    I never said anything about the pentagon and to think that to question anything regarding 9/11 is to believe all the goofy stuff out there (or possible purposeful disinfo) is ridiculous.

    I happen to think my perspective is more independent than yours, in terms of group think (I'm not categorizing you, other than saying "we're in this together" by reminding you that you're a truther too.) But you want to put me into a group that you believe is out there and I don't think exists.

Speak Your Mind