Hardworking Nathan Guttman gets the first interview with Hawaiian-beshirted Larry Franklin, the former Defense department analyst who was the only man to go down in the investigation of AIPAC lobbyists Rosen and Weissman:
His superiors at the time were both Jewish: Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense, and Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, whom Franklin believes was a target of the investigation.
This bugs me. It's "who" not "whom." In this clause "whom" is not the object of anything, it's the subject. I'm not surprised they were going after Feith. Feith's former law partner is now a settler, he has Theodor Herzl's picture on the wall, as a teenager he was writing letters to the Times defending Israel's expansion, as an adult telling Netanyahu to abandon the peace process. And he's completely opaque about his religous nationalist agenda.
According to Franklin, the investigators he dealt with believed “that [Jonathan] Pollard had a secret partner, a mole, probably in the OSD.” This quest to expose the mole, Franklin said, was, in part, “energized by a more malevolent emotion — antisemitism.”
In part, it was also fed by a deep suspicion toward Israel. “In the intelligence community,” he said, “you refer to Israelis as ‘Izzis’ and it doesn’t have a pleasant connotation. They can’t get away with kikes, so they say Izzis.” This suspicion became clear to Franklin as he learned of the way investigators viewed activists of the pro-Israel lobby.
I don't know. Why should the intelligence community [heart] Israel? Also, my grandfather's name was Isadore, and now and then his daughters-in-law, not all of whom were Jewish, called him Izzy.
{ 35 comments }
If the Israel lobby is so powerful, why can't they get Jonathon Pollard released? I mean according to you the lobby got the Iraq war started and until recently had the nation in a strangle hold.
The US intelligence community knows more about the threat that Israel and its fifth column pose to America than anyone. No wonder it doesn't like Israelis — or their fifth column.
RE: …This bugs me. It's "who" not "whom." MY COMMENT: What about replacing both 'who' and 'whom' with who(m)? I'm sick and tired of the bastards and I'm getting too damn old to diagram sentences!
I think the grammar is correct. "Franklin believes" is the principal clause, and Feith is an object of that clause.
It's hard to believe that US intelligence agencies have a problem with Izzy's. They consistently let Izzy organizations get away with crimes. Especially the ADL, JDL, and other B'nai B'rith associated organizations. Look at the way they treated Muslim charities while Israeli charities have been responsible for billions sent to settlers for weapons and living expenses, not to mention the training camps set up in the usa that teach jews combat training including live ammo shooting ranges. If these were Muslim, they would be considered "terrorist training camps."
The US intelligence community's initiatives vis-à-vis the Israelis and their fifth column are sabotaged and overruled time and again by bought-off politicians and Zionists in the government hierarchy. Just look at how the Rosen and Weissman case was handled. Look at how the Jane Harman case was squelched. If unethical politicians and corrupt Zionists in the hierarchy want to squash investigations of other corrupt Zionists to save there own asses, there's not much the intelligence community can do. Who do they appeal to? Joe Lieberman? Rahm Emanuel? Intelligence Committe chair Dianne Feinstein?
Very true, Ed. The career intelligence officers — the guys who provide James Bamford with intel — are disgusted by the infiltration of our government by Israel Firsters. Everytime something worth pursuing reaches the top brass, it gets squelched. Interesting note: Larry Franklin also had something to do with Michael Ledeen's Niger yellowcake scam that led us into war with Iraq. Google "yellowcake larry franklin michael ledeen" for some interesting webpages.
A Jew who doesn't balk at dragging the rest of Jewry into the same hole he's in — kike is kind.
Read an article a month or so ago reporting that Lehman Bros. retained a stockpile of yellow cake. Hmmm… the conspiracy theories are too opaque to parse. That the US goverment is not monolithic in intent or interest seems apparent, despite the oft demonstrated urge to demonize Obama for not solving every perceived problem right now, already.
Why should the intelligence community heart any country, except their own? Love makes you blind.
Dear Ed If you could do more sensible posts like this and avoid the antisemitic rants you might be taken more seriously.
Jeff Stein also reported this story at CQ SpyTalk, but in an entirely different way which left out any notions of an anti-semitic government conspiracy. http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/spytalk/2009/07/israe... Stein also reports that Franklin says that a Zionist tried to get him to fake suicide in order not to testify against Rosen and Weissman.
Adjective clause introduced by a relative pronoun as direct object. so whom is correct.
Franklin's comments in the interview raise some interesting questions. Let's suppose that U.S. intelligence agencies like the FBI and CIA have good reason to believe that Israel has moles working in high places throughout the U.S. government and that AIPAC routinely works with these moles to funnel valuable American defense and diplomatic secrets to Israel. Let's suppose that Israel's possession of these secrets is believed to compromise U.S. national security. If, as a result of this, many U.S. intelligence agents exhibit resentment toward Israel (in general) and suspicions concerning Jews and non-Jewish Zionists in U.S. government positions, what should we make of this? Is it hard evidence of endemic anti-Semitism in our intelligence agencies? I think that all the hypotheticals I pose above are likely to be real facts. But nonetheless I don't think it is likely that endemic anti-Semitism exists in our intelligence agencies, as Franklin suggests.
I agree; those guys must be very frustrated by the double standard applied to all their hard work when it comes to any activity involving Israel. Their patriotic allegiance is stifled, their work product is ignored, they can't say anything about the particular threat they've uncovered except to their work peers as they know that will be the end of their careers. Imagine how the victims of the USS Liberty attack must have felt all those years they were muzzled.
I agree. Here's a snip: Though Weissman didn’t take the document, he read its content, which was allegedly classified, and the sting operation succeeded. Weissman hurried back to AIPAC headquarters with the supposedly classified information disclosed it to Rosen, who subsequently relayed it to an Israeli diplomat. Even without Weissman taking the actual paper, prosecutors, who were wiretapping all the players, felt they had enough of a case to press charges against both Rosen and Weissman for communicating national defense information. 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. Rosen told the Forward in response: “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.” http://www.forward.com/articles/108778/ Seems obvious Rosen was working directly for the foreign state of Israel; he disclosed what he thought was classified information to an Israeli official. Rosen equates the NAACP with Israel, a foreign state. The NAACP is a US domestic institution, not, say Nigeria. Ergo Rosen and Weissman (who carried the information to AIPAC's Rosen, which is similar to the hypothetical of Rosen's, i.e.,carrying information to the NAACP) do not view Israel as a foreign state. Seems pretty clear this case should have gone to trial. Rosen's analogy equates blacks and jews and ignores the fact that the NAACP is a domestic civil rights organization more like the ADL than AIPAC, and even more remote is Israel. Tribal identity politics uber alles–even the security of the USA.
Here's Franklin describing the guy who offered moneybags for his defense and suggested he fake a suicide–Franklin didn't bite as he knew it was easy to get away with murder once someone is thought to be dead: "Well, the guy was definitely a Zionist," Franklin said. "And he was a true believer. And like a lot of true believers, he's beyond good and evil. They're not subject to the laws the rest of us are." http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/spytalk/2009/07/aipac...
Rosen: “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.” — That state of mind, in a nutshell, demonstrates why no US Zionists, Left or Right, should be allowed anywhere near US classified information. They profess to see nearly everything as a threat to their precious Israel, and psychologically justify their back-stabbing of America by convincing themselves that they're saving Jews. In fact, nearly every self-enriching act of treachery by a Zionist against gentiles can be rationalized as being done "for the Jews." Jonathan Pollard also made that argument. And don't think that half these Zionists are motivated by anything other than the power and riches that the network can provide by ripping off Americans. Was Rosen motivated by idealism or money? I doubt he even knows.
Citizen has some relevant comments on this too, up farther in this thread. Was it Eric Hoffer who wrote that old book True Believers?
I think it's a good time to bring up the 1996 Israeli Threat Memo disseminated by the Defense Investigative Service, resulting in a wave of attacks from the ADL that ended up prompting a formal apology from the Pentagon, with the DoD laying the blame on a "low-ranking individual" and promising to never release anything like it again.
when is someone going to write about hr1955 and jane harmon. they are getting a lock on us. soon it will be a crime to discuss these things on a blog. it will be a crime to be "anti-semitic". no one is writing about this.
So the first interview with Larry Franklin in the American press appears in the Forward of all places, and the subject of "antisemitism" looms large. Talk about gatekeeping!
Harmon's thought police bill, passed widely by the House, has been sitting in the Senate for how long now? A year? Not much on the internet about it since then. Wonder exactly who is sitting on it? And why? It will have a huge impact on the dissident blogosphere. It will wipe it out. Say good-by to the last option to save Free Speech in USA.
Hehe, I was just thinking how shocked I was that this was the first post by Ed where I agreed with everything he had to say. You called it bullseye, Ed. Who do they appeal to? They ought to start appealing to the court of public opinion with leaks from what I would bet both my legs is a mountain of damning surveillance of Lobby and Israeli operatives collected over 50 years. Actual courts of justice are obviously a waste of time until the political environment is shaken up, but the time will come when Law will have its day. I sure hope someone is making copies of all that stuff so it doesn't go down the memory hole if an unreliable custodian is appointed.
Larry Franklin's attempt to purvey via Jeff Stein that he was actually just trying to help America is a pack of lies. He conveniently leaves out the fact that investigators found dozens of secret and top secret documents dating back decades hidden in his house. These are worth two years in federal prison per document, with no need to prove any conspiracy, just unlawful possession. It has always irked me that he wasn't charged specifically for these. He hasn't been playing for our team for a very long time. Israel 'Spy Scandal' Figure Larry Franklin Breaks Silence, by Jeff Stein http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/spytalk/2009/07/israe...
Does anyone hold the short list to what Jews are planning to run in the next national senate cycle? Newly chosen Al Franken was an equal exchange, and Frank Lautenberg was also challenged by his own ilk and kept his seat. I know Steve Israel is hot to spend his cash for NY.
Well, I'll take the liberty of posting this–straight from a US intelligence man's horsy mouth: Q&A: "U.S. and Iran Share an Equal Monopoly on Violence" Omid Memarian interviews former CIA operative ROBERT BAER Robert Baer Credit:Hossam el-Hamalawy BERKELEY, California, Jan 23 (IPS) – "Obama is going to have continuous pressure from Israel to attack Iran and, in some way, their nuclear facilities, and this is going to be tied up with Gaza and Lebanon," according to Robert Baer, a former top Central Intelligence Agency operative and the author of "The Devil We Know: Dealing with the New Iranian Superpower." In an interview with IPS, Baer discussed the regional implications of the Gaza conflict and his take on Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Hamas and Hezbollah, three major groups in the Middle East which have been called terrorist organisations. Excerpts from the interview follow. IPS: Some analysts believe that attacking Hamas in Gaza, two years after the 34-day war between Israel and Hezbollah, is a part of a bigger plan which will end with attacking Iran's nuclear facilities. Is Israel walking this path? Robert Baer: No. I think that there is a military veto in attacking Iran. It's just not possible. IPS: Why is that impossible? RB: Well, for one thing, we know there will be an Iranian reaction in the Gulf. Iran will not be attacked like Hamas and just respond locally. It will respond internationally. It has no choice. This is their deterrence power. In Iran, it is very important to understand a lot of lessons. If you look on the IRGC [Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps] website, you see the lessons they learned from the Iran-Iraq War. These wars are wars of attrition; they go on forever. You just can't win them, especially against the United States. So they have developed secondary asymmetrical warfare ability, guerilla warfare, which is very effective. You know some of the best minds in Iran went into the Pasdaran [Revolutionary Guards], and they weren't necessarily fanatics. In a sense, they were much more nationalists. And in my experience, these people in the Pasdaran, in the operational level, are probably the most capable, intelligent/guerilla force/political thinkers in the Middle East, including Israel and Jordan. And they knew exactly what they were doing. And they do not clearly fit in to any political definitions in Iran. IPS: Is the possibility of a limited attack on Iran's nuclear facilities by Israel also out of question? Especially given what we learned in a recent New York Times article that last year, Israeli leaders asked President Bush to carry out such an attack, though the president did not accept. RB: Totally out of the question. Even Bush understood this. The New York Times is right when it says that Bush vetoed an Israeli attack, simply because there is a balance of power in the Middle East between the U.S. and Iran, and it's a fairly even balance of power. I mean not in terms of aircraft tanks or submarines, but in a monopoly of violence, there is equality. There is no question there is equality. We could bomb Tehran, but what does that get you? Nothing. It's sort of like bombing the U.N. compound in Gaza by Israel. What does that give the Israelis? Nothing. Yeah they could destroy it, but what does that give them? Hamas still is going to exist. You can bomb all military bases in Iran over a period of two weeks, but Iran is still there – it still has the ability to project power, project its will and maybe even come out of that type of conflict even stronger. And Iran's power is so economical, the price of oil is not going to make any difference, simply because the idea of arming Hezbollah or supporting Hamas in Damascus is nothing in terms of money. I mean the price of oil could go down to 10 dollars, and it's still an affordable defence for Iran.
And here's the rest: IPS: Obama has repeatedly mentioned talking to Iranian leaders and bringing change to U.S. foreign policy. How could the designation of Dennis Ross as a key advisor on Iran policy contribute to his promises? RB: Dennis Ross – the important thing is the Israelis are comfortable with him. If a dialogue with Iran occurs, they know he won't betray them. I mean they have had years and years of testing this guy. He's Jewish, he's been honest with the Israelis; he's gone along with their projects, even the crazy ones. If a dialogue is open, the Israelis know they won't be surprised. If Obama had brought someone new in, some professor from Harvard that the Israelis didn't know, they would immediately freeze him out and there would be huge political blowbacks. IPS: Regarding Ross's positions on certain issues in the Middle East and particularly Iran over the past decade, how will Obama be able to adopt a new foreign policy path in the region? RB: Well, he [Obama] needs the backing of the Democratic Party to get these things through politically, and that's why he has brought in people like Dennis Ross and Denny Blair, the Director of National Intelligence, simply because he needs that political backing. He cannot bring in untried people and run them against the Democratic Party, because if there is an opening with Iran, there will be a connivance of Israel, maybe a silent one, simply because the Israelis have to go along. In American politics, you can't do anything in the Middle East without the approval of Tel Aviv, at least on some level. It's impossible. I mean, I cannot think of a country that is so beholden to a small country like this, even a superpower, in all of history. I can't even think of it. IPS: And why is that? RB: Look at New York City. Look at the major newspapers. They have a Zionist agenda. They do. I'm not Jewish. I'm not anything. I don't care about the Israelis. And I'm not anti-Semitic. It's just a fact. I suggested to my publisher writing a book on Israel, and he said forget it. You can't talk about the reality of Israel. The only place you can talk about the reality of Israel is in Israel. They tell you things you will never hear in the United States. IPS: Like what? RB: For instance, why are people on Gaza so unhappy? Well, if you had to live in a prison, wouldn't you be unhappy? You would never get that in the New York Times. Look at the New York Times; it's almost an extension of Israel. IPS: What is the impact of the Gaza conflict on the future of Iran-Israel and United States relations? Have the recent attacks destroyed Hamas entirely? RB: No, it's impossible. Hamas is an idea. Hamas is not an organisation. Hamas is an idea, and unless the Israelis go in and force 1.5 million people into Egypt, they will never subdue Gaza. They can go in and they can slaughter the leadership and put 10,000 people in jail, and Hamas will come out stronger. The losers in this will be Fatah. IPS: What are the main characteristics of Hamas and Hezbollah's military and political behaviour? RB: They redefined the idea of warfare in geography. The fact that Hezbollah dug into caves or the fact that they use fiber optics to communicate shows enormous sophistication and primitive warfare in combination. I mean, what army in the world uses fiber optics except Hezbollah? You can't intercept fiber optics. There is nothing you can do. You look at [Hebollah leader Hassan] Nasrallah, and he has redefined Islamic politics because he's gone into an alliance with a Christians. Bin Laden wants to kill Christians; I'm going to reduce it to that. Nasrallah is looking at them as allies. (END/2009)
No one will ever take an antisemite like Ed seriously.
It's really appalling that a guy who seems so addled got the job he did. In the first place he said that the reason he passed on the info/materials to the AIPAC guys was because he wanted to get it not to Israel but … to the U.S. National Security Council! And thus he says he was just shocked that gee, these Israel lobby guys would pass it on to Israel. Of course this might not be true, although if so it still shows that he believes everyone else is just stupid beyond words. However there's good evidence that it's Franklin that stupid beyond words: After all what's he saying now after confessing that he believed that the "Zionist" approach to him about a fake suicide was really going to be a cover for killing him? Well, he's slamming the U.S. *Intell* community for being paranoid about Zionist operaters. Yeesh, what a maroon.
As the graduate of a yeshiva where Israeli students were derided and picked on, I can tell you that the proper slurs for Israelis are "dibs" and "fishes."
Joseph Massad and Yeshiva Slurs
We live in a world that was probably created by Jewish espionage: Wikipedia, Hummus, Falafil, WWI, Dolchstoßlegende. If one looks at complaints about Jews from both Catholic and Protestant Germans during Martin Luther's later anti-Jewish phase, one quickly gets the impression that anger is developing over profiteering and Jewish trading in information, to with, free-lance espionage. BTW, the wars of the Reformation were a great boon for Jewish merchants because suddenly a lot of gentile competition was eliminated when Christians stopped trading with each other on sectarian grounds.
Why would Martin Luther attack the Catholic Church for its hypocritical lack of morality and universal ethics–and not also attack the Jewish Establishment? The Jewish Establishment has since then always agreed with his attack of the Catholic Church, but has always characterized his attack on the Jewish Establishment as "anti-semitic." A clear historic case of which way the wind always blows.
Martin Luther probably did not know very much about the local German Jewish community at the start of the Reformation. The Jewish corporate structure was nowhere near as large or as wealthy as that of the Catholic Church at this time period. Hypocrisy of the upper Jewish mercantile elite was far less visible than the hypocrisy of the upper Church elite, and there was a confusion in the minds of gentile critics of Jewish behavior between duplicity (espionage) and perfidy (refusal to convert). The gentiles did not realize how much Jewish livelihood depended on access to business networks that would become inaccessible upon conversion.
Comments on this entry are closed.