The best line in Nathan Guttman's piece in the Forward about the Justice Department's effort to prove that a pro-Israel spy ring was operating inside the Pentagon, AIPAC and the Israeli Embassy came from Steve Rosen, the former AIPAC lobbyist whose indictment on espionage charges the Justice Department recently dropped.
In 2003 the Justice Department stung Rosen. Here is how it went down. The feds had flipped a Pentagon analyst named Larry Franklin, who had been passing along secrets to Rosen and fellow AIPAC'er Keith Weissman. And in June 2003 they gave Franklin a fake cable saying that Israeli agents in Kurdistan were in mortal danger. Franklin brought the paper to Weissman at a restaurant. Weissman went back to AIPAC. Rosen promptly told an Israeli diplomat.
Franklin told the Forward that the AIPAC guys' actions crossed a line. The Forward got in touch with Rosen, who bridled.
"Franklin did not expect us to warn the Israelis that they would be kidnapped and killed? That’s like telling officials of the NAACP that there is going to be a lynching, but don’t warn the victims, because it is a secret.”
Rosen's response is fascinating for a few reasons. First, it shows that he sees himself as part of the Jewish nation, which transcends geographical borders. It is an expression of loyalty to the Jewish people. Second, his analogy of AIPAC to the NAACP during Jim Crow was echoed by Jeffrey Goldberg, the pro-Israel journalist, in a New York event two years ago where he said that gentiles can't say what is anti-Semitic, Jews can; just as blacks know what is racist and whites are not able to make that determination.
There is a second Goldberg echo here. In 2002 Goldberg wrote a piece from Kurdistan for the New Yorker on Saddam Hussein's use of chemical weapons that basically said that Saddam was another Hitler bent on acquiring nuclear weapons. The piece ended, of all places, at the Israeli embassy in Washington, where Goldberg talked to a diplomat about Israel's destruction of the nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981. The Kurdistan-Israel connection.
The Goldberg piece reminds us of the backdrop for the Justice Department investigation: the Iraq War. Franklin says that the Justice Department investigation was aimed at Doug Feith, the Under Secretary at the Pentagon, who pushed the Iraq war. Indeed, Justice was conducting this investigation through the spring of 2003, even as the U.S. was launching the disastrous Iraq war (at Goldberg's urging, too).
It is obvious in retrospect that a lot of the energy for the investigation must have come out of a feeling inside the Justice Department that Iraq war supporters were not being upfront about their true loyalty, Israel, which of course had been attacked by Iraq several times.
I share that feeling; and one of my grand irritants is Doug Feith's non-mea-culpa book of last year, War and Decision, where he basically put all the blame on George Bush, absolved the neoconservatives of any agency in the war, and failed to report the long memorandum purporting to link Al-Qaeda and Saddam that his office provided the White House to goad the country to war. At about the same time, Jeffrey Goldberg was also writing a piece for the New Yorker arguing that Saddam and Al-Qaeda had made an "alliance."
I believe that Feith and Goldberg pushed the war in good part out of concern for Israel's security. Goldberg has had dual loyalty. He once moved to Israel and served in the Israeli Defense Forces, back when he thought that anti-Semitism was a river running under American society. Feith, who is now a blogger (which is what he should have been doing instead of plotting the destruction of an Arab society), has often put Zionism and Israel first– and he has good reason to do so. He says in his book that his Polish father narrowly escaped the Holocaust. "Both of his parents, four of his sisters, and all three of his brothers–my grandparents, aunts, and uncles–were murdered in the Holocaust."
Anyone with that background would be preeminently concerned about anti-Semitism. And the primacy of the Holocaust in the Jewish memory/experience means that Jewish liberals and even leftists have given the neoconservatives little resistance as they pushed a militant case on behalf of the Middle East's only democracy. We are all waking up from that now, the Jewish community is. The process will not be complete until neoconservatives and their adjutants are compelled to answer openly, Why do they feel unsafe in America? Is there any real basis for this insecurity?
Related posts:
- ‘LA Times’ says neocons who pushed Iraq war ‘possibly harbored dual loyalty to Israel’
- ‘LA Times’ says neocons who pushed Iraq war ‘possibly harbored dual loyalty to Israel’
- John Judis Scooped Joe Klein on ‘Dual Loyalty,’ But You Can’t Find His Piece on TNR Site
- Meretz’s Hapless Position on Iraq War Shows Dangers of Dual Loyalty
- Nightmare, or bad spy novel, or unindicted coconspirator (the Israel lobby)
{ 18 comments }
Re Rosens’s “lynching” quote. How many Jewish Zionists in government have betrayed America on behalf of Israel over the years using just such a rationale? And on another level, how many Jewish Zionists in America have betrayed American and gentile interests on behalf of the interests of political Judaism using just such a rational? All of those Jewish Zionists in the big government/“private enterprise” revolving door ( http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/288163... ) who got rich by helping to engineer all those economic bubbles over the years that have bankrupted Americans no doubt went through a similar thought process: ‘It’s justified because we are enabling the survival of political Judaism and Zionism by enriching ourselves. Average Americans be damned.’
Should you warn the targets of a lynching that they are in danger or should you simply leave it with the police? Especially if you have direct channel to the targets and they are your friends. Most people would have a hard time saying "No, I wouldn't let the victims know". But this guy says that's more than mere decency. If Israelis are the targets it's an expression of loyalty to the Jewish people — as if something is wrong with that. Of course, in his eyes it automatically makes you disloyal to the United States.
Phil, I agree with much of what you said, but the fake cable is a very special story to me. It feels a bit weak to make him believe Israeli agents are endangered. What about: a) a law called non-assistance of a person in danger, b) it feels you should at least ask, isn't this a test that MUST work, a scenario that is created to prove what it claims to want to test? Not sure if I expressed this well? In other words given "a)" wouldn't that have worked with a rather high percentage of people? Isn't it cynical to ask anyone to keep the knowledge about the danger to whoever's life secret? Why didn't they construct a more difficult scenario in which his double loyalty, a term so dear to you, would have been really tested. In other words, a plot in which he had to choose to either sacrifice an American agents or Israelis. One of the real century old dilemmas? If you ask me only such a scenario would ultimately proof your point. Don't bother to comment Ed, I'll read the article now.
"The process will not be complete until neoconservatives and their adjutants are compelled to answer openly, Why do they feel unsafe in America? Is there any real basis for this insecurity? " I think most Americans know why. No big secret. Jews feel unsafe in America because it is filled with goyim, in particular Christians, who have hated Jews for two thousand years and always will. Christians are anti-Semitic, always have been, always will be. Anti-Semitism is an almost contagious mental illness that can never be cured and thus Jews must always mistrust goyim, generally, and Christians in particular. To help prevent future white Christian massacres of the Jews the goyim must be continually reminded of their racial/religious complicity in Jew-slaughter. This is why we have a Holcaust museum on the American national mall in Washington. More preferably, their children must also be reminded, every year, in compulsory Holocaust classes in public schools (in many states) of their proclivity forJew-killing.
Franklin said he felt betrayed by the two former AIPAC staffers. He believed that he was sharing information with them so that they could pass it to other government officials, and was disappointed to learn they conveyed it to Israeli diplomats and to the press. “I do think they crossed a line when they went to a foreign official with what they knew was classified information,” Franklin said. I more and more realize, I have to look closer into the research on the dynamics of trust or not quite the opposite mistrust, after all they both reduce reality just as conspiracy lines of thought. but is it realistic to expect US government officials to react. Maybe with a close ally? But isn't it much more sure to take a direct link to Israel in that case given the slowness of bureaucracies? And isn't this what he supposedly was fighting? Well this no doubt is a selective choice of the larger tale.
I have news for you Big Bill: to use your yardstick, one of the least safe places in the world for a jew is in Israel. That is the one country whose citizens most distrust their fellow citizens, where you can never turn your back completely, where different groups of jews have far more animosity towards each other than most any "goy" in the US has towards any "Jew". israel is a place where tribalism has run amock, where the religious and the secular hate each other with a passion not reserved for the worst of Cossacks. The next massacres against the jews will be perpetrated by other jews – in israel. please mark my words on that. If you don't believe me, go to israel with a trusted hebrew translator at your side (a "real" American, not a dually loyal Israeli!). And ask the staunchly secular what they think should be done with the haredi (sterilize them after 4 kids, some would say. most want to or at least penalize them economically). Then, for good measure, go ask some haredi what should be done with the seculars (your ears will ring!). And if still not convinced, go talk to your settler bretherns, though for that you may not need any translator. They are mostly Americans – who, happily for us all, live over there and not over here. The hatred israelis espouse for each other is a sign of a tribe coming apart from within. Phil's job here – and ours – is to ensure the tribal splitting process will not infect us all here with the kind of poisonous virulence that's taken hold of the not-so-good jews over there.
"agents wired Franklin…and provided him with a fake classified document alleging there was clear life-threatening danger posed to Israelis secretly operating in Iraq’s Kurdish region. Passing on the information would help seal the case against the AIPAC staffers…Franklin said he felt betrayed by the two former AIPAC staffers. He believed that he was sharing information with them so that they could pass it to other government officials, and was disappointed to learn they conveyed it to Israeli diplomats and to the press." Zionists willing to take illegally obtained US classified information to the Israeli government — and to the press! — simply cannot be trusted to ever keep any classified information secret. That there are so many Jewish Zionists with access to classified information, and so many gentile Zionist traitors like Franklin willing to collaborate with them, explains why America should never fight another war until it has purged these from the government: it cannot keep even basic classified intelligence secret. These Zionists rush it off to Israel and the media at first opportunity. No wonder we’re getting our asses kicked all over the world.
Larry Franklin is a liar and a traitor. Consider his ridiculous claims in the context that he had 37 secret and 38 top secret documents that he had stolen over several decades hidden inside his house. He knew damn well who he was dealing with, and what was going to happen with the classified information he was giving them. USA v. Franklin: Statement of Facts, October 5, 2005 http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/aipac/franklin_facts.p...
Look at the biblical rendition of Jews in relation to Jews–the talmud says such friction is not right–it's only ok against the non-Jews. I'd like to wave a magic wand and all Jews would go live in Israel, an Israel devoid of US Taxpayer or UN veto support. Makes me a zionist, no?
LeaNder22 is way over her head. Franklin was a simple career opportunist who saw the double standard and tried to take advantage of it, but he too was over his head. A little Eichmann.
The issue is not Jewish insecurity but Jewish power: Patterns of Jewish Power. Rosen and Weissman passed secrets because they thought they could get away with it, and guess what! They were right.
Thanks, Colin.
Larry Franklin should be cleaning toilets in Lewisburg Federal pen for the next 12 1/2 years. Let's not forget his role in the Niger yellowcake false document scam involving Michael Ledeen — the fake documents were used by Feith and the Office of Special Plans to lead us into the quagmire of Iraq. Look it up on Google.
"Why didn't they construct a more difficult scenario in which . . . he had to choose to either sacrifice an American agents or Israelis.? That would have been a great test. Even so, I think there's no doubt whom Rosen would have chosen–the Israelis.
What if it was Palestinian lives at stake? Would you let them die?
Sorry, but Israel does not qualify as "the Middle East's only democracy." It has a long way to go before it is a true democracy, and judging from the current trend it may never get there. "Why do they feel unsafe in America? Is there any real basis for this insecurity?" I don't know whether any irony was intended in these questions, asked as they were of neoconservatives. My reply is Yes, there is some basis for apprehension. The program and activities of the neoconservatives themselves, over time, will inevitably raise the level of anti-Semitism in America. In my opinion, modern-day Americans are a people who are naturally averse to such passions as anti-Semitism. But if you want to find a basis for concern about it, you need do no more than take a close look at American government, financial institutions and enterprises, and mainstream media. The over-representation of Jews leaves Jews as an ethnic group highly exposed to blame for untoward outcomes. Nervous neocons, one would think, are surely aware of this – even if they remain oblivious to the role they play in making matters worse.
I find it interesting that Phil labels any publication or person that doesn't follow his Israel hating agenda as pro Israel. Why not be consistant label people like Mike Levy as anti Israel Mike Levy or anti Israel Joseph Dana or Israel hating George Galloway?
Sending false classified reports to AIPAC.
Comments on this entry are closed.