There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Sibel Edmonds has lied.

[BuyingThyme]

There is evidence, however, to suggest that the things she translated and or interpreted were not true.

As far as I know, everybody in a position to know what she worked on says she's a reliable witness.

Hopefully we'll get a chance to find out.

[H2O Man]

1. Recommended.

There are many, many possibilities.

[Botany]

2. Well somebody is lying

From the start, the fantasy is riddled with factual errors. It claims that an "intimate" relationship between a fictional female Turkish
spy and the congresswoman began at the funeral of the congresswoman's mother after 2000, however, Rep. Schakowsky's mother
died thirteen years earlier in 1987.

[Ken Burch]

4. I wonder if Sibel actually WROTE that part of the story

Or if the American Conservative added it as their "price" for printing her piece.

You'd really have to ask yourself if that would've been in there if Sibel had been published(as she SHOULD have been)by The Progressive or The Nation or online by the Huff Post?

[maddezmom]

5. someone should have checked into the dates before publishing it

and making it the lead story all over the internet. :thumbsdown:

[BuyingThyme]

12. That doesn't necessarily mean somebody was lying.

It could be that they were talking about somebody else. It could be that the Turks were trying to bait a bogus investigation. It could be lots of things.

I think we should find out.

[cali]

3. OK, then Sibel is simply repeating lies that are easily discredited

and has no interest in facts. That's just dandy.

[OregonBlue]

6. What do you mean no evidence? Her mother died in 1987 but Edmunds is claiming this affair began

after her mother's funeral in 2000? Sounds like evidence to me.

[BuyingThyme]

13. That doesn't mean she's lying.

[closeupready]

7. I don't get why so many on DU seem obsessed with her and her claims.

To most people, her name is as unknown as a person on the street. Further, her claims, whatever they are, are so complicated and hard-to-explain, that when you ask people here what she is about, in a nutshell, you only get links to threads, or multi-page transcripts and such.

It's fine if you take her seriously, but don't be surprised if many people just move on to more concrete and relevant stuff.

[BuyingThyme]

14. We've been told by people in the know that her claims should be taken seriously.

[HamdenRice]

8. I think people are misunderstanding what her testimony is

She is telling about the conversations she translated -- not the veracity of the content of those conversations. She is also in a good position to know from her own reading and translation whether certain alleged facts were repeated by different actors.

I trust Edmonds to be telling the truth to the best of her ability. No one would go through what she went through just to make stuff up for the spotlight.

Also, if she were just making stuff up, she wouldn't have been hit with so a gag order.

[Recursion]

9. What did she "go through"?

No one would go through what she went through just to make stuff up for the spotlight.

Umm... she lost a job and was told she couldn't reveal classified information she learned in the course of that job (ie, basically everything she saw there). Why is she made out to be some kind of martyr?

[BuyingThyme]

15. Well stated.

[Mrs. Overall]

10. She posts on DU sometimes.

[mmonk]

11. If she lied and was easily shown to be not credible,

why is she the most gagged person in United States history? It makes no sense.

[BuyingThyme]

16. It could be that the CIA was feeding nonsense to the Turks and

the nonsense came back via Sibel and the wiretaps.