Reply #166: But the point is, "Did she KNOWINGLY misrepresent facts", or misinterpret them or get wrong info.. [View All]

[cascadiance]

... or was there another explanation for her not getting the proper delineation of what was happening. Who knows, perhaps it was at a "townhouse" that was a temporary residence (like a hotel) that technically was NOT Schakowsky's townhouse, but was in her name temporarily while she was in DC. The fact is, WE DON'T KNOW what the circumstances were, and perhaps Sibel didn't either! She was putting forth second hand information. And there probably were many other points in data she gives out that someone could pick a part and said she had one detail wrong, and even if it wasn't intentional, they'd use it as a means to exploit it.

Another example of where facts could be wrong would be if a tape mentioned that some data originated from "MIT", which could either mean the Massachussetts Institute of Technology, or the MIT which is the Turkish equivalent of the CIA, which is who Mehmet Eymur worked for which is one of the individuals that Sibel was looking at as one of her targets. If one isn't careful of understanding the context of this, this could have also been "confused" and used as a way of "dismissing" her allegations. There are likely MANY places where such translations could be flawed and which those seeking to shut down such investigations could try to dismiss them and imply that everything was wrong because one small detail was not interpreted or understood properly. There are many potential reasons for these sorts of things, and when these happen the best way to resolve such conflicts is to fully investigate the data involved to know what was really there and matching it up with what was alleged, to determine if the substance of what is being alleged is true or isn't true.

Sibel isn't a computer, and neither are the rest of us. We're human beings. We'll mess up on details. But we still have overall sensibilities, principles, and level of understanding of what goes on around us that are the important things to analyze, not whether we made minute mistakes in otherwise important efforts to bring forth issues that the American people should know about what our government is doing in our name. Now is not the time to judge Sibel. Nor is it the time to judge Ms. Schakowsky. That time will come later when we see what the real facts are. If we're not allowed to see those facts, then BOTH women will have taints on their standing, and our government itself will also, and those future whistleblowers who also want to let us know of what is going wrong in our country will have one more reason to avoid coming forward with what they know, since they know as human beings, they will be SKEWERED by those who wish to shut down our democratic processes to defend their actions, and future corrupt politicians will have that much more reason to feel they will be able to get away with criminal actions in our government.

However, if we do follow through and do an investigation, either we will validate Sibel's concerns, and help to:

a) fix the problems that she is pointing to and help make our government stronger towards serving the people instead of corrrupt individuals.
b) serve as a disincentive to those that in the future might try to profit from corrupt actions in our government, knowing that there are still processes that can shut them down if whistleblowers can be empowered to help with that effort.
c) if it is found that Sibel HAS been lying and manufacturing all of her information, it will ALSO serve as a disincentive for any who might have similar ideas of trying to manufacture false information to smear others, since the process ultimately will bring out the truth and shut those sorts of efforts down.
d) if Sibel is only guilty of misinterpreting some data, or bringing forth false data that was distorted by others, and both Sibel and Ms. Schakowsky were tainted earlier before such information could be brought forward, we show that the process can ultimately narrow in on where the wrongdoing occurred and allow others to feel that human beings such as Sibel Edmonds and Jan Schakowski can function in government and even with perhaps mistakes on both sides still be able to function if they're heart and their talents are allowed to work in the right direction.

If we don't investigate this, we will all pay the price! That is why this is NOT the time to judge either set of people. It is the time to say that the government must tell us what is really going on and make sure we the people can understand what our "employees" are actually doing, and how we as "managers" need to fix the shop we're "managing".