Sibel Edmonds’s plight is not only getting some needed attention after a long wait, she is also finally receiving some public vindication.
Her lawsuit against the FBI, as you may recall, was quickly quashed by Ashcroft’s Justice Department, allegedly for national security purposes. (If you don’t recall the details about Edmonds, here’s some background.)
Edmonds insisted she had been fired because she complained about inadequate translation procedures at the FBI, which she believes contributed to the government being unprepared on 9/11. Just a few weeks ago, the FBI finished looking into her complaints, but blocked the information from public view.
Fortunately, however, the FBI’s report was leaked and — surprise, surprise — confirms our worst suspicions.
A classified Justice Department investigation has concluded that a former F.B.I. translator at the center of a growing controversy was dismissed in part because she accused the bureau of ineptitude, and it found that the F.B.I. did not aggressively investigate her claims of espionage against a co-worker.
The Justice Department’s inspector general concluded that the allegations by the translator, Sibel Edmonds, “were at least a contributing factor in why the F.B.I. terminated her services,” and the F.B.I. is considering disciplinary action against some employees as a result, Robert S. Mueller III, director of the bureau, said in a letter last week to lawmakers. A copy of the letter was obtained by The New York Times.
There are several interesting angles to Edmonds’ plight, but this leaked report highlights an ongoing problem with the Bush administration’s approach to secrecy.
The investigation into Edmonds’ complaints bolstered her claims. She was fired, in part, because she had the courage to point out systemic flaws in the FBI’s approach to translations and the suspicious behavior of a co-worker, whom she believed may have been working with terrorists.
Every step of the way, Edmonds’ knowledge and concerns has been a matter of tremendous inconvenience to the Department of Justice.
Ms. Edmonds worked as a contract linguist for the F.B.I. for about six months, translating material in Turkish, Persian and Azerbaijani. She was dismissed in 2002 after she complained repeatedly that bureau linguists had produced slipshod and incomplete translations of important terrorism intelligence before and after the Sept. 11 attacks. She also accused a fellow Turkish linguist in the bureau’s Washington field office of blocking the translation of material involving acquaintances who had come under F.B.I. suspicion and said the bureau had allowed diplomatic sensitivities with other nations to impede the translation of important terrorism intelligence.
The Edmonds case has proved to be a growing concern to the F.B.I. because it touches on three potential vulnerabilities for the bureau: its ability to translate sensitive counterterrorism material, its treatment of internal “whistle-blowers,” and its classification of sensitive material that critics say could be embarrassing to the bureau.
The Justice Department has imposed an unusually broad veil of secrecy on the Edmonds case, declaring details of her case to be a matter of “state secrets.” The department has blocked her from testifying in a lawsuit brought by families of Sept. 11 victims, it has retroactively classified briefings Congressional officials were given in 2002, and it has classified the inspector general’s entire report on its investigation into her case.
But this last point is important. Why was the inspector general’s report on her claims classified? The NYT obtained a leaked copy and exposed the report’s conclusions — primarily that the FBI was irresponsible and negligent in ignoring Edmonds’ concerns. While Edmonds may be aware of state secrets, the circumstances that led to her dismissal do not appear to be a matter of national security.
The report detailing her dismissal was hidden because it highlighted the FBI’s disregard for Edmonds’ (accurate) charges, as well as the callousness with which the agency treated a whistleblowing agent who deserved a promotion, not a pink slip.
I’m sure it’s tempting to want to hide embarrassing gaffes that reflect poorly on the administration, but to misuse the classification process to hide mistakes borders on criminal. It’s the kind of thing that cries out for congressional hearings and oversight, if only GOP lawmakers hadn’t sold their souls to Karl Rove four years ago.