The AIPAC Case and Prejudice

[Behind the Aegis]

The conspiracy case against two former AIPAC lobbyists came to an inglorious end in May when the government dropped all charges after 3 1/2 years of pre-trial maneuvers.

It was a curious case: First, the lobbyists, Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, were charged under an obscure section of the Espionage Act of 1917, a law that had been used only once before -- unsuccessfully and never against private citizens for disclosing classified information. Second, they were targets of a bizarre sting in which they were fed false information suggesting that the lives of U.S. and Israeli operatives in Iraq were at risk and that American officials were refusing to take steps to protect them. The accusation was not that they brokered this information to some foreign enemy but that they offered it to everybody they could, hoping, among other things, to get a reporter from The Post to publish it so that it might draw the attention of the right U.S. officials and save U.S. lives. In short, even if the two were guilty as charged, they look more like whistle-blowers than spies.

But the most curious element of the case is why it was ever brought. Why set up a sting unless you believe there's some underlying pattern of wrongdoing to be exposed? What were the counterespionage people after?

After three years of working on a book on this case, I am still not sure. But now the wired informant in the middle of the affair, Larry Franklin, has raised the specter of bias. The former Pentagon analyst who leaked the bogus tip to the lobbyists told the Washington Times last month that investigators "asked about every Jew I knew" in his office. Anti-Semitism was "part of this investigation and may have been an initial incitement of this investigation."

If so, Ground Zero would be the 23-year-old case of Jonathan Pollard. Here one had a real spy, an American Jew working for the Navy who, out of concern for Israel as well as cash, copied and delivered thousands of classified documents. After his arrest in the 1980s, the belief took hold within counterintelligence circles that he was part of a larger spy ring. This led to the search for a "Mr. X," a high-ranking national security official who had helped direct Pollard to needed documents and continued to operate within the government. So the creation myth was born.

more...

[leveymg]

1. If Wasserman has been working on a book fro 3 yrs about this and doesn't know why the FBI was

wiretapping Naor Gilon, the Mossad Chief of Station in DC, who was the target -- along with the neocons in Dougie Feith's OSP -- then he's truly hopeless.

"Anti-semitism" my ass.

[question everything]

2. Then please, tell us

The crux of the story is that a case was built against two AIPAC lobbyists that ended up in a big zero.

Why else would the FBI try to find a conspiracy with the "Israeli lobby?" Supposedly the Bush administration was a pro-Israel one, recognizing that both countries had similar goals - whether or not "approved" by DU.

From the story:

"After years and millions of dollars spent investigating the nefarious "Israel Lobby," the case produced no stolen secrets, no money changing hands, no covert meetings, no high-level, dual-loyal officials, no harm to the national interest and no spies. Pardon me, but where's the corned beef?

If a powerful lobby threatens national security, shouldn't the patriotic supporters of that organization be informed of the evidence? Or if government officials have allowed prejudice to covertly victimize innocent people shouldn't that behavior be made transparent? Or, if an important ally is using ethnic ties to turn supporters into spies, shouldn't the public know?"

One would think that DU, of all places, would condemn such harassment but, hey, DU applauds attacks my Hezbollah and Hamas so anything that would hurt Israel and American Jews is a cause for celebration. Right?

[leveymg]

3. Wasserman misrepresents the investigation and its findings. Read the indictment.

Rosen and Weissman were mischarged. The decision to charge them under the 1917 Espionage Act was a mistake, as I and some others around here pointed out at the time. The US does not have an Official Secrets Act, but the decision to charge them that way was taken by a Bush-appointed US Attorney. That virtually assured the case would be thrown out.

The Indictment in the Franklin case revealed that Col, Franklin was, among other things, planting information about Iran's nuclear program in Pentagon files "at the suggestion of" Naor Gilon, the Mossad Chief of Station in DC. Meanwhile, Condi was working with Rosen and Weissman at AIPAC on the same project to create a casus belli for the U.S. to go to war with Iran. It was Track II of the Iraq WMD falsification scandal.

Please see, Daily Kos: Condi & AIPAC: Cooking the Books on Iran or Iraq WMDs?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/24/125345/141

The AIPAC-OSP case is all about Iran, specifically intelligence officers at the Israeli Embassy in DC were working with neocons in the Pentagon to salt DoD files and stovepipe intelligence about Iran. What was the nasty surprise about Iran (or was it Iraq?) that Condi was trying to cook up with lobbyists for Israeli in the Spring of 2003?

Circumstantial evidence for this interpretation is also provided by the parallel efforts by Rosen and Franklin to plant stories about Iranian WMDs at the NYT. See, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/2/14024/94613

2/2/06 FBI Probes AIPAC Leak of Classified Iran Docs to NYT

The FBI is probing an effort by two former employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) to disclose classified information to the New York Times. This appears to have been part of an effort to cultivate Times reporters in order to selectively leak classified Iran WMD documents.

Larry Franklin, a former Iran desk officer at the Pentagon, recently pleaded guilty to trading classified papers with Israeli intelligence officers and employees at AIPAC. Two AIPAC employees accused of working with Franklin are now being tried in federal court in Alexandria, VA.

This prosecution follows the much publicized scandal involving ex-NYT reporter, Judy Miller, as the conduit of false information about Iraq WMD.

ALSO, SEE

Daily Kos: The Larger Scandal Behind Harman-AIPAC - Israeli Spying ...... who is believed to be referenced in the same indictment. ... That operation involved salting Pentagon files with Israeli-suggested materials about Iran's nuclear program was a catastrophe for Mossad, AIPAC, OSP, and the neocons.
http://www.dailykos.com/.../-The-Larger-Scandal-Behind-Harman-AIPACIsraeli-Spying-in-the-U.S. -

[sui generis]

4. You're generalizing about DU

Unfortunately, with extremists from either side the cardinal sin is to refuse to take sides. Right?

The fact is that nobody is going to waste money prosecuting anything unless the prosecution has a case that can bear fruit. That means that the decision to not prosecute had nothing to do with being pro or anti anything, but everything to do with whether under the law a case could be made.

AIPAC is dirty, these days. There, I've taken a stance, not a side.