Say what you will, but not one thing she has alleged has been refuted or disproved by anyone. Before you denounce without any evidence or knowledge, I'd recommend you read her deposition which is much better and more thorough than the interview in question.

You're completely devoid of any facts here.

Nothing Edmonds has claimed has been refuted or discredited by any source official or otherwise. Can you explain that or would you simply prefer to make the unsubstantiated claim that since you don't like the publication this information appears in it must not be true?

What site the interview appears on has no bearing at all on whether or not what she is saying is true which is really the only thing that matters. Given that nothing she's got to say has ever been refuted and much of what she has claimed has actually been substantiated by Congressional investigation I wouldn't be so quick to judge her by the publication printing the story if I were you or others.

Just for fun, the allegations detail that the sale of secrets to Turkey then led to acquisition of such technologies to Pakistan and thence to Iran, but, interestingly (and these allegations go back to the 1990's) not to Iraq (which of course borders Turkey and was none too friendly with its neighbor). And of course the fixation of these alleged conspirators was Iraq.

One of the most interesting passages, for me, was this (from the Giraldi interview):

EDMONDS: They had arrangements with various companies, some of them members of the American Turkish Council. They had arrangements with Kissinger’s group, with Northrop Grumman, with former secretary of state James Baker’s group, and also with former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft.

The monitoring of the Turks picked up contacts with Feith, Wolfowitz, and Perle in the summer of 2001, four months before 9/11. They were discussing with the Turkish ambassador in Washington an arrangement whereby the U.S. would invade Iraq and divide the country. The UK would take the south, the rest would go to the U.S. They were negotiating what Turkey required in exchange for allowing an attack from Turkish soil. The Turks were very supportive, but wanted a three-part division of Iraq to include their own occupation of the Kurdish region. The three Defense Department officials said that would be more than they could agree to, but they continued daily communications to the ambassador and his defense attaché in an attempt to convince them to help.

Meanwhile Scowcroft, who was also the chairman of the American Turkish Council, Baker, Richard Armitage, and Grossman began negotiating separately for a possible Turkish protectorate. Nothing was decided, and then 9/11 took place.

Scowcroft was all for invading Iraq in 2001 and even wrote a paper for the Pentagon explaining why the Turkish northern front would be essential. I know Scowcroft came off as a hero to some for saying he was against the war, but he was very much for it until his client’s conditions were not met by the Bush administration.

This sounds like the pact to divide Poland between the Germans and Soviets in 1939. It also shows that the supposed pillars of realpolitik, Kissinger and Scowcroft, as well as the supposed 'antiwar' Armitage (who was a prime leaker in the Plame case) were involved in the schemes.

Plame was allegedly involved in counterproliferation activities in Iran. Meanwhile Edmonds' pack of jokers were engaged in proliferation activities there. (And Edmonds alleges that her cover was blown by Grossman in 2001.)

I have to wonder what Joe Wilson (Plame's husband, not the Congressman) knew when he penned that famous editorial. Did he know his wife's cover had already been blown, and that Government officials (prominently including Armitage) were proliferators of nuclear secrets to the region? It ties up too neatly.

And of course, we still hear about the existential threat of Iran's nuclear program- from the very people who put the secrets on the market.

I still stand behind my statement the article in question:Exclusive: Schakowsky Responds to Edmonds Claim, Vehemently Denies Lesbian Tryst With Turkish Agent is quite good. (link above screwed up somehow). I also stand behind my observation that Edmonds has some pretty credible supporters.

Here's her response to Schakowsky:

I am, and have been, reporting intercepted communication of targeted operatives; more or less verbatim.
.
1) This particular operation(s) was based in IL; not DC.
The timeline covered 1996-2002 (January).
The targeted townhouse in question was in IL. The operatives discussed their plans to bug the townhouse in detail. Is this a townhouse she owned/owns? I don't know. Did it belong to the female operative? I don't know. Did the set up take place? Yes; confirmed by the FBI surveillance team; Chicago-Field Office.
.
2) The female operative in question was to accompany Mrs. Schakowsky to the funeral for 'the mother' and stay with her afterwards.
.
3) What the targets wanted from Mrs. Schakowsky had to do with their operations in IL. Her husband's role was important in that operation.