| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 9:05 am Post subject: How Soon Will the U.S. or Israel Bomb Iran? |
| Democracy and the Neocons (most of whom are racist Zionist Jews who are all out for Israel first): Marriage of Convenience:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/07/24/democracy-and-the-neocons-a-marriage-of-convenience.php
The Zionist Cowboy and his cronies have no problem with 1,000 US soldiers/marines and many more thousands horribly wounded for their war for Israel agenda in the Middle East:
http://www.nowarforisrael.com
Read at the following (Life of an American Jew in Racist/Marxist Israel) article how Zionists in Israel and in the USA would trick the USA into fighting wars in the Middle East for Israel (with many Americans dying and getting horribly wounded) like we have seen already in the invasion/occupation of Iraq (with Syria and Iran to follow as conveyed in the 'A Clean Break' agenda of Zionist Jews Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser of page 261 of James Bamford's new book ('A Pretext for War'):
http://www.rense.com/general31/lifeof.htm
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/090204A.shtml
How Soon Will the U.S. or Israel Bomb Iran?
By Steve Weissman
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Thursday 02 September 2004
I can just hear the Presidential conversation. "Did I say Iraq backed
al-Qaeda?" he asks with a boyish grin. "Oh, heck, I meant Iran. I
always get those
two mixed up."
What should Iran do? What would you do if you were an Iranian
Ayatollah?
The President of the United States has branded Iran part of the "Axis
of
Evil." He has demanded that Iran "abandon her nuclear ambitions." He
has claimed
the right to wage pre-emptive war against any enemy he chooses.
To add weight to these threats, the U.S. House of Representatives
passed a
resolution on May 6, 2004, calling on the president "to use all
appropriate
means to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons." The vote was
overwhelming: 376 for, three against. On July 22, the Senate passed a
similar resolution
with wording only slight less inflammatory.
The Americans now have nearly 150,000 troops just across the border
in
Iraq. They also have aircraft and missiles in easy striking distance,
as do the
Israelis, who - as the New Yorker's Sy Hersh reported - are currently
working
with the Kurds to make raids into Iran.
Put yourself in Israel's shoes. The Iranians are building a major
nuclear
industry, with the ability to enrich bomb-grade Uranium-238 and
reprocess
plutonium from spent nuclear fuel rods. Iran has facilities in Tehran,
Bushehr,
Natanz, and Arak, and could soon produce 15-20 nuclear weapons a year,
according
to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
The International Atomic Energy Agency has already found traces of
the
bomb-grade U-238 in Natanz and Tehran. The Iranians say this is only
contamination
from used centrifuges they bought from other countries.
An Iranian Bomb would challenge Israel's nuclear monopoly in the
Middle
East, creating a short-range, hair-trigger stand-off that would
continually
encourage each side to strike first before the other could.
Now think like an American neo-conservative. You and your fellow
policy
wonks have struggled for years to persuade both Democrats and
Republicans in
Washington and successive Likkud governments in Tel Aviv to play
hardball
throughout the Middle East. You urged them to expand control over the
world's
diminishing supply of oil and to overthrow nasty regimes, especially in
Iraq and Iran.
Your neo-con colleagues currently hold key posts in the Pentagon and
elsewhere in Washington, but your policies and performance have made a
hash of Iraq,
causing President Bush to turn increasingly to other advisors. Worse,
Mr.
Bush could lose the November election amidst a burgeoning spy scandal
that widely
paints neo-cons, whether Christian or Jewish, as not-to-be-trusted
Israeli
agents.
As in the perfect storm, the activities of the three groups - Iranian
Ayatollahs, Israeli Likkudniks, and American neo-cons - are now
creating just the
right conditions for a ghastly outcome - an aerial attack on Iran's
nuclear
installations. While no one can predict with certainty where the
madness might
lead, it would clearly isolate Israel and the United States even more
from most
of the world, unify rival Shi'ite and Sunni Muslims, and encourage the
Iranians to intervene massively in Iraq.
On the other hand, an October Surprise to make America safe from an
Islamic
Bomb might help Mr. Bush win a close election.
Can anything stop an attack on Iran, whether before the elections or
- as I
think more likely - after? At this juncture, even a cockeyed optimist
has
difficulty seeing much hope.
From where they stand, the Iranian leaders have little choice but to
press
ahead with their quest for nuclear weapons. They may say - as did the
Pakistanis, Indians, and Israelis before them - that they want only
peaceful uses of
atomic energy. They may see nuclear power as the best way to meet a
growing
population's demand for electricity. In fact, much of the program began
under the
Shah, and with American blessings. But the Bush Administration has
given Iran
the strongest argument yet for wanting atomic bombs - and the missiles
to
drop them on Tel Aviv. Nothing less seems as likely to hold the
pre-emptive
Bushies at bay.
Given the way atomic energy works, the Iranians could move ahead with
an
entirely peaceful program to produce electricity, as they say they are
doing.
They could allow full inspections and monitoring from the International
Atomic
Energy Agency. But once they reprocess plutonium or enrich Uranium 238
in
sufficient quantities, they are only weeks away from having an atomic
bomb.
Senators Kerry and Edwards, the Democratic contenders, have suggested
offering Iran "a great bargain." If the Iranians give up their capacity
to produce
bomb-grade materials and accept full supervision to ensure that they
have,
other countries - including the United States - will provide whatever
nuclear
fuel Iran needs.
It's a great start. But a Kerry Administration would also have to
offer
security guarantees far beyond any yet mentioned - or any they could
easily
mention. Too many Americans still remember with bitterness the pictures
of
Ayatollah Khomeini's young supporters holding fifty-two of our fellow
citizens as
blindfolded hostages. The Great Satan, as the Iranians called us, does
not forgive
and forget without an enormous effort.
Nor would the Iranians find it easy to overcome their rational fears.
As
Shia Muslims, with historic and religious interests in the Shia areas
of Iraq,
they would increasingly bump up against the Americans, who show no sign
of
leaving no matter who wins the November election. Even if President
Kerry could
contain the inevitable conflicts, some future president could easily
return to
the evil-hunting crusades of the current incumbent. Better a nuke in
the hand,
which some analysts believe the Iranians could have as early as 2006.
For the Israeli Likkudniks, and for me personally, the situation
looks like
déjà vu all over again. We all saw the same thing back in 1981, when
Prime
Minister Menachem Begin took on the French government of then-Prime
Minister
Jacques Chirac, which was helping Saddam Hussein build his OSIRAK
nuclear reactor
near Baghdad. Israel's Mossad led the charge. In April 1979, secret
saboteurs
entered a small French engineering firm on the French Riviera in
Toulon,
where they dynamited the reactor core only hours before the Iraqis
could take
delivery. In June 1980, in a hotel room in Paris, an unknown intruder
bludgeoned
to death an Egyptian nuclear engineer who played a leading role on the
OSIRAK
project. In August, a series of bombings and telephone threats
terrorized
French and Italian engineering firms supplying equipment to OSIRAK.
During that time, Mossad was also secretly leaking information to
journalists about Pakistan's effort to build what Prime Minister
Zulfikar Bhutto called
his "Islamic Bomb." Among the journalists was a team from BBC's
Panorama, for
whom I worked. The Israelis, who would never meet me face-to-face,
could
never understand why a Nice Jewish Boy insisted on checking out first-
hand every
bit of information they proffered. In fact, our team discovered several
parts
of the Pakistani story Mossad had apparently missed. We also found an
Israeli-American defense analyst who boldly predicted on camera that
the Israelis
would bomb the Iraqi reactor, which they did on Sunday, June 7, 1981.
What a scoop! Breathlessly recounted in several books and articles,
the
daring Israeli attack still stands as a model of pre-emptive warfare,
which the
Israelis now threaten to repeat on Iran. According to one recent news
story,
they have already rehearsed the bombing run, much as they did before
sending
their American-supplied F15's and F16's to wipe out OSIRAK.
But, before jumping on the bandwagon, please remember some
oft-forgotten
facts. Prime Minister Begin rushed the attack in part because he feared
his
party would lose a close election. Seeing military action as the only
remedy, he
also feared that his opponent Shimon Peres would try working
diplomatically
with the newly elected French President Francois Mitterand, who had
already
ordered significant steps to safeguard the Iraqi reactor. On the other
side, one of
Begin's staunchest supporters for the attack was his Minister of
Agriculture,
Ariel Sharon.
For the American neo-cons, recent events could push them to become
even
more extreme. The Israeli spy flap involving retired Air Force Col.
Larry
Franklin focuses heavily on Iran, and the cooperation between leading
neo-cons, the
Israelis, and Iranian exiles to overthrow the Ayatollahs. There are
also
suggestions of improper Pentagon arms transfers to Israel, unauthorized
back-channel
dealings with foreign governments and private groups, and the question
of how
closely the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, the chief
pro-Israeli
lobby group, works with the Sharon government.
All of this will terribly embarrass the neo-cons, who will grasp at
any
straw to divert attention from both their failures in Iraq and their
efforts
behind the scenes. Enlarging the Iraq war to Iran offers the perfect
solution. In
the advice often attributed to their Pentagon protector, Defense
Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld, "If you're having difficulty dealing with small
problems, make
them bigger."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Someone ordered out the big broom...make that the Shop Vac!
Spy probe scans neo-cons' Israel ties
By Jim Lobe
SEATTLE - The growing scandal over claims that a Pentagon official passed highly classified secrets to a Zionist lobby group appears to be part of a much broader set of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Pentagon investigations of close collaboration between prominent US neo-conservatives and Israel dating back some 30 years.
According to knowledgeable sources, who asked to not be identified, the FBI has been intensively reviewing a series of past counter-intelligence probes that were started against several high-profile neo-cons, but which were never followed up with prosecutions, to the great frustration of counter-intelligence officers, in some cases.
Some of these past investigations involve top current officials, including Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz; Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith, whose office appears to be the focus of the most recently disclosed inquiry; and Richard Perle, who resigned as Defense Policy Board (DPB) chairman last year.
All three were the subject of a lengthy investigative story by Stephen Green, published by Counterpunch in February. Green is the author of two books on US-Israeli relations, including Taking Sides: America's Secret Relations with a Militant Israel, which relies heavily on interviews with former Pentagon and counter-intelligence officials.
At the same time, another Pentagon office concerned with the transfer of sensitive military and dual-use technologies has been examining the acquisition, modification and sales of key hi-tech military equipment by Israel obtained from the US, in some cases with the help of prominent neo-conservatives who were then serving in the government.
Some of that equipment has been sold by Israel - which in the past 20 years has become a top exporter of the world's most sophisticated hi-tech information and weapons technology - or by Israeli middlemen, to Russia, China and other potential US strategic rivals. Some of it has also found its way onto the black market, where terrorist groups - possibly including al-Qaeda - obtained bootlegged copies, according to these sources.
Of particular interest in that connection are derivatives of a powerful case-management software called Promis that was produced by Inslaw, Inc in the early 1980s and acquired by Israel's Mossad intelligence agency, which then sold its own versions to other foreign intelligence agencies in the Middle East, Asia and Eastern Europe.
But these versions were modified with a "trap door" that permitted the seller to spy on the buyers' own intelligence files, according to a number of published reports.
A modified version of the software, which is used to monitor and track files on a multitude of databases, is believed to have been acquired by al-Qaeda on the black market in the late 1990s, possibly facilitating the group's global banking and money-laundering schemes, according to a Washington Times story of June 2001.
According to one source, Pentagon investigators believe it possible that al-Qaeda used the software to spy on various US agencies that could have detected or foiled the September 11, 2001 attacks.
The FBI is reportedly also involved in the Pentagon's investigation, which is overseen by Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for International Technology Security John A "Jack" Shaw, with the explicit support of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
The latest incident is based on allegations that a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) career officer, Larry Franklin - who was assigned in 2001 to work in a special office dealing with Iraq and Iran under Feith - provided highly classified information, including a draft on US policy towards Iran, to two staff members of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), one of Washington's most powerful lobby groups. One or both of the recipients allegedly passed the material to the Israeli Embassy.
Franklin has not commented on the allegation, and Israel and AIPAC have strongly denied any involvement and say they are cooperating fully with FBI investigators.
The office in which Franklin has worked since 2001 is dominated by staunch neo-conservatives, including Feith himself. Headed by William Luti, a retired navy officer who worked for DPB member Newt Gingrich when he was speaker of the House of Representatives, it played a central role in building the case for war in Iraq.
Part of the office's strategy included working closely with the Iraqi National Congress (INC) led by now-disgraced exile Ahmad Chalabi, and the DPB members in developing and selectively leaking intelligence analyses that supported the now-discredited thesis that former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein had close ties to al-Qaeda.
Feith's office enjoyed especially close links with Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I Lewis Libby, to whom it "stovepiped" its analyses without having them vetted by professional intelligence analysts in the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the DIA, or the State Department Bureau for Intelligence of Research (INR).
Since the Iraq war, Feith's office has also lobbied hard within the US government for a confrontational posture vis-a-vis Iran and Syria, including actions aimed at destabilizing both governments - policies which, in addition to the ousting of Saddam, have been strongly and publicly urged by prominent, hardline neo-conservatives, such as Perle, Feith and Perle's associate at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), Michael Ledeen, among others.
Despite his status as a career officer, Franklin, who is an Iran specialist, is considered both personally and ideologically close to several other prominent neo-conservatives, who have also acted in various consultancy roles at the Pentagon, including Ledeen and Harold Rhode, who once described himself as Deputy Secretary of State Paul Wolfowitz's chief adviser on Islam.
In December 2001, Rhode and Franklin met in Europe with a shadowy Iranian arms dealer, Manichur Ghorbanifar, who, along with Ledeen, played a central role in the arms-for-hostages deal involving the Reagan administration, Israel and Iran in the mid-1980s that became known as the "Iran-Contra Affair".
Ledeen set up the more recent meetings that apparently triggered the FBI to launch its investigation, which has intensified in recent months amid reports that Chalabi's INC, which has long been championed by the neo-conservatives, has been passing sensitive intelligence to Iran.
Feith has long been an outspoken supporter of Israel's Likud Party, and his former law partner Marc Zell has served as a spokesman in Israel for the Jewish settler movement on the occupied West Bank. He, Perle and several other like-minded hardliners participated in a task force that called for then-Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu to work for the installation of a friendly government in Baghdad as a means of permanently altering the balance of power in the Middle East in Israel's favor, permitting it to abandon the Oslo peace process, which Feith had publicly opposed.
Previously, Feith served as a Middle East analyst in the National Security Council in the administration of former president Ronald Reagan (1981-89), but was summarily removed from that position in March 1982 because he had been the object of a FBI inquiry into whether he had provided classified material to an official of the Israeli Embassy in Washington, according to Green's account.
But Perle, who was then serving as assistant secretary of defense for international security policy, which, among other responsibilities, had an important say in approving or denying licenses to export sensitive military or dual-use technology abroad, hired Feith as his "special counsel" and later as his deputy, where he served until 1986, when he left for his law practice with Zell, who had by then moved to Israel.
Also serving under Perle during these years was Stephen Bryen, a former staff member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the subject of a major FBI investigation in the late 1970s for offering classified documents to an Israeli intelligence officer in the presence of AIPAC's director, according to Green's account, which is backed up by some 500 pages of investigation documents released under a Freedom of Information request some 15 years ago.
Although political appointees decided against prosecution, Bryen was reportedly asked to leave the committee and, until his appointment by Perle in 1981, served as head of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), a group dedicated to promoting strategic ties between the US and Israel and one in which Perle, Feith and Ledeen have long been active.
In his position as Perle's deputy, Bryen created the Defense Technology Security Administration, which enforced regulations regarding technology transfer to foreign countries.
During his tenure, according to one source with personal knowledge of Bryen's work, "The US shut down transfers to Western Europe and Japan [which were depicted as too ready to sell them to Moscow] and opened up a back door to Israel." This is a pattern that became embarrassingly evident after Perle left office and the current deputy secretary of state, Richard Armitage, took over in 1987. Soon, Armitage was raising serious questions about Bryen's approval of sensitive exports to Israel without appropriate vetting by other agencies.
"It is in the interest of the US and Israel to remove needless impediments to technological cooperation between them," Feith wrote in "Commentary" in 1992. "Technologies in the hands of responsible, friendly countries facing military threats, countries like Israel, serve to deter aggression, enhance regional stability and promote peace thereby."
Perle, Ledeen, and Wolfowitz have also been the subject of FBI inquiries, according to Green's account. In 1970, one year after he was hired by Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, an FBI wiretap authorized for the Israeli Embassy picked up Perle discussing classified information with an embassy official, while Wolfowitz was investigated in 1978 for providing a classified document on the proposed sale of a US weapons system to an Arab government to an Israeli official via an AIPAC staffer.
In 1992, when he was serving as under secretary of defense for policy, Pentagon officials looking into the unauthorized export of classified technology to China found that Wolfowitz's office was promoting Israel's export of advanced air-to-air missiles to Beijing in violation of a written agreement with Washington on arms re-sales.
The FBI and the Pentagon are reportedly taking a new look at all of these incidents and others, in the words of a New York Times story on Sunday, to "get a better understanding of the relationships among conservative officials with strong ties to Israel".
It would be a mistake to see Franklin as the chief target of the current investigation, according to sources, but rather he should be viewed as one piece of a much broader puzzle.
(Inter Press Service)
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FI02Ak02.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 1, 2004
It Will All Blow Over Soon
Poor Larry Franklin
By KATHLEEN and BILL CHRISTISON
Poor Larry Franklin. For some years, the line between Israel and the U.S.-in terms of policies, of perceived national interests, of patriotic fervor-has been slowly disappearing, and in the circles Franklin travels, among the coterie of neocons inside and outside the Bush administration, there never was a line at all. Aren't Israel's interests U.S. interests? Isn't it true that what's good for the U.S. is good for Israel? (Or maybe that should be the other way around.) Why shouldn't he give classified documents to Israel? Why shouldn't he traffic in secret material with Israel's principal lobbyists in Washington? It's really all the same country anyway.
Isn't it?
Yet here is Franklin, just doing what comes naturally, minding his own business (Israel's business is his business, as it is the business of his boss Douglas Feith and of his boss's boss Paul Wolfowitz) caught up in an anachronistic bureaucratic snafu by some FBI agents who actually still seem to believe that Israel is different from the U.S.
What's a guy to do?
But not to worry, Larry. You'll undoubtedly be rescued by the boss of those FBI agents. John Ashcroft knows there's no line between Israel and the U.S. What God-fearing, bible-thumping, Christian fundamentalist wouldn't? If Ashcroft doesn't come through, there are all your bosses: Feith and Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld himself. And Dick Cheney knows what's what. And don't misunderestimate George Bush's own fealty to his buddy Ariel Sharon.
And if John Kerry somehow gets himself elected and all those Bush administration defenders flee the scene, you'll still probably be safe. Kerry himself regularly swears loyalty to Israel. Kerry gets it. He calls himself a friend of Israel "by conviction and at the deepest personal level." The cause of Israel, he says, "must be the cause of America." What more could a double agent want? Who needs the neocons?
Don't worry, Larry. You'll get off.
Note: The Christisons are scheduled to be on a local Santa Fe, New Mexico radio station from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, September 2, which will be broadcast on the internet. The show is the Diego Mulligan Show on KSFR, Santa Fe's public radio station. (Since they are in the U.S. Mountain time zone, that would be 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time, 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time. In Europe and the Middle East, this would be quite late: 11:00 p.m. in the UK, midnight in France, 1:00 a.m. Friday in Amman and Jerusalem.)
They will talk about rebuilding a Palestinian home demolished by Israel in the West Bank village of Anata and about U.S policies toward Israel and Palestine.
Since the radio station puts all shows on the internet in "real time," anyone who has the Windows Media Player on his or her computer can listen to the show at http://www.ksfr.org at the correct time. When the website comes up on your screen, click on "Listen Live," and then again on "Click to Launch Stream."
Bill Christison was a senior official of the CIA. He served as a National Intelligence Officer and as Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis. He is a contributor to Imperial Crusades , CounterPunch's new history of the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan.
Kathleen Christison , a former CIA political analyst, is the author of Perceptions of Palestine: Their Influence on U.S. Middle East Policy and Wound of Dispossession: Telling the Palestinian Story . They can be reached at: christison@counterpunch.org . | |  | | Alpha | | Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 2:49 pm Post subject: Israeli espionage and national security |
| Reliable Ally Strikes Again
http://www.sobran.com
August 31, 2004
by Joe Sobran
Israeli espionage and national security
Not again.
The FBI says it has found a Pentagon employee who
has been slipping secrets about Iran to the Israelis. The
Israelis deny everything, as usual, and the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) likewise denies
serving as the conduit.
There are many reasons to be skeptical of these
denials. Here are just a few.
The state of Israel -- "our only reliable ally in
the Middle East," as they say -- has a long record of
spying and technology theft against its allies,
especially the United States. New Zealand has recently
charged two Israeli nationals with spying.
In 1985 the Israelis insisted that the espionage of
Jonathan Pollard was a "rogue operation." Yet they
promoted Pollard's handler, set aside a pension for
Pollard himself, and have persistently demanded Pollard's
release from an American prison, where he is serving a
life sentence. They have neither returned nor identified
the documents he stole, many of which were apparently
passed along to the Soviet Union and China. Today Pollard
is a national hero in Israel.
The Pentagon employee now under scrutiny, Lawrence
Franklin, was stationed at the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv
for two years and is said to be strongly pro-Israel and
anti-Iranian.
Franklin works for Undersecretary of Defense Douglas
Feith, a supporter of and advisor to the Likud Party, an
admirer of the radical Zionist Vladimir Jabotinsky, and
of course a hawk in the current war. Long before the
state of Israel was founded, Jabotinsky urged the
creation of a much larger Jewish state, on both sides of
the Jordan -- a dream his disciples still cherish; a
recent biography of him thanks Feith in the
acknowledgments.
Perhaps most damning -- and certainly most amusing
-- is that the NEW YORK TIMES has found a character
witness, identified as "a friend of Mr. Franklin": none
other than Michael Ledeen, one of the most fervent, not
to say fanatical, neoconservatives in Washington. Having
Ledeen vouch for your patriotism is a bit like having
Alger Hiss swear that you aren't a Soviet agent. You have
to wonder if the TIMES story quoting Ledeen was meant as
a bit of deadpan humor.
Franklin, in short, would appear to be part of the
Zionist network that has enjoyed a free rein in the Bush
administration, just as the old Soviet network did in
Franklin Roosevelt's administration.
Dante reserves the lowest circle in Hell for those
who betray their benefactors. That would seem to cover
the Israelis' contempt for the United States. But an
Israeli spokesman says his country wouldn't do such a
thing to its "cherished friend," never mind that it has
often done so before.
Moreover, it has done so with impunity. And that's
the real problem. Our rulers, from Lyndon Johnson to
Bush, including the U.S. Congress, have taken no punitive
action when the Israelis have treated America
treacherously. There wasn't even a congressional inquiry
when the Israelis made a murderous attack on the USS
Liberty in 1967, nor when Pollard was found to have
stolen a huge cache of secrets two decades later.
Now, when George W. Bush has put the highest
priority on national security, it appears that the
Israelis are still helping themselves to such secrets,
expecting to get away with it as always. The individual
agent who is caught may, like Pollard, pay a stiff price;
the Israeli government, never. Franklin is reportedly
cooperating with the FBI; but he may still go to prison.
Billions in U.S. aid to Israel, however, will continue,
as will the pro-Israel policies that have made us so many
enemies around the world, helped provoke the 9/11
attacks, and are sure to bring us more grief.
Will any American president ever stand up to the
Israelis? Not likely. All the men who have come within
shouting distance of the presidency in the last few years
have been shamefully obsequious toward Israel, including
John Kerry, Al Gore, and John McCain. Even Howard Dean
quickly backed away from his call for a more
"even-handed" policy in the Middle East.
Even-handed? Why not a simply pro-American policy
that puts American interests ahead of Israeli interests?
Unthinkable. When the two countries' interests clash,
American interests must yield. Gore and McCain have
actually told Jewish audiences that the United States
must stand prepared to go to war -- to sacrifice American
blood -- to defend Israel.
Such amazing declarations don't even rate news
reports. But if a presidential candidate promised he
would never sacrifice American lives for Israel, he would
achieve instant notoriety.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If someone has forwarded this to you, we encourage you to
subscribe to the e-mail or print editions of SOBRAN'S.
The e-mail version is $39.95 per year and includes 156
columns (3 per week) by Joe Sobran plus the monthly
edition of SOBRAN'S newsletter.
Joe Sobran is a syndicated columnist and the editor of a
monthly newsletter, SOBRAN'S. His books include ALIAS
SHAKESPEARE (The Free Press 1997) and HUSTLER: THE
CLINTON LEGACY (Griffin Communications, 2000).
+++++++
"Deep down, I believe that a little anti-Semitism is a good thing for
the
Jews - reminds us who we are." --Jay Lefkowitz (NYT Magazine. Feb.12,
1995. Page
65). Jay Lefkowitz is now Deputy assistant to the President for
Domestic
Policy. A sick man! Don't you think?
"An anti-Semite is someone that the Jews hate."
---Joe Sobran
Another way of putting it:
An anti-Semite used to be someone who does not like Jews; now it is
someone who the Jews do not like.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peace is patriotic!
Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
253 West 72nd street #1711
New York, NY 10023
http://www.RePortersNoteBook.com
Available for Talk-Radio interviews 24hours 212-787-7891
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The QUESTION:
To subscribe and grow with knowledge or
to unsubscribe and Die Stupid?
Send an E-mail to:
RePorterNoteBook@aol.com | | | | dangerousdna | | Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 6:41 pm Post subject: |
| Spy Scandal's Roots are Deep
by Juan Cole
published by Informed Comment
Spy Scandal's Roots are Deep
Jim Lobe argues that the FBI investigation that caught up Pentagon Iran expert Lawrence Franklin is much wider than initially thought, and focuses on the unauthorized transfer to Israel of highly sophisticated military software and designs. Since many Israeli arms merchants connected to the government in Tel Aviv sell to the black market, some of this military technology has ended up in the hands of countries that have poor relations with the US, and some may have ultimately been resold to al-Qaeda.
Lobe writes,
According to knowledgeable sources, who asked to not be identified, the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) has been intensively reviewing a series of past counter-intelligence probes that were started against several high-profile neo-cons but never followed up with prosecutions, to the great frustration of counter-intelligence officers, in some cases.
Some of these past investigations involve top current officials, including Deputy Secretary of Defence Paul Wolfowitz; Undersecretary of Defence for Policy Douglas Feith, whose office appears to be the focus of the most recently disclosed inquiry; and Richard Perle, who resigned as Defence Policy Board (DPB) chairman last year.
All three were the subject of a lengthy investigative story by Stephen Green published by Counterpunch in February. Green is the author of two books on U.S.-Israeli relations, including Taking Sides: America's Secret Relations with a Militant Israel, which relies heavily on interviews with former Pentagon and counter-intelligence officials.
Meanwhile, The Jerusalem Post reports that the FBI raided the offices of Steve Rosen, the director of foreign policy issues for the American Israel Public Affairs Committe, an enormously influential lobby.
Earlier, rumors swirled of an FBI investigation of how the Pentagon Office of Special Plans, set up by Doug Feith, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, skewed intelligence on Iraq and may have illegally engaged in intelligence-gathering. In fact, that investigation was being conducted by the Senate Intelligence and House Judiciary Committee staffs, not by the FBI. They are also looking at the possibility that Pentagon employees pursued unauthorized contacts aimed at preparing the way for overthrowing the governments of Iran and Syria. This according to the Boston Globe:
' Senate Intelligence and House Judiciary Committee staff members say inquiries into the Near East and South Asia Affairs division have found preliminary evidence that some officials gathered questionable information on weapons of mass destruction from Iraqi exiles such as Ahmed Chalabi without proper authorization, which helped build President Bush's case for an invasion last year.
The investigators are also looking into a more serious concern: whether the office engaged in illegal activity by holding unauthorized meetings with foreign nationals to destablize Syria and Iran without the presidential approval required for covert operations, said one senior congressional investigator who has longtime experience in intelligence oversight. '
A pattern of illegal payments for such information is also at issue. Laura Rozen says she
has evidence that Pentagon officials asked that Manuchehr Ghorbanifar be paid for documents he provided.
By the way, I personally do not expect any dramatic developments from all these investigations. AIPAC has powerful protectors on Capitol Hill, and past charges that it was involved in espionage for Israel have always been buried. As for the Neocon cult in the Pentagon, even if they did something illegal, they will not suffer much because of it. Look at where the Iran-Contra criminals are, who subverted the US Constitution and stole arms from the Pentagon to sell illegally to Khomeini. One Iran-Contra figure, who lied to Congress, now serves in the National Security Council as the person in charge of the Israeli-Palestine issue. That is Elliot Abrams, who was pardoned by Bush the elder and now sets White House policy on among the more important issues affecting US relations with the Muslim world. Bush may as well have just appointed Ariel Sharon to advise him on how to deal with Ariel Sharon (though to be fair, Sharon is probably more pragmatic than and to the left of Abrams).
Moreover, if Sharon and AIPAC decide that they need the US government to take military action against Iran, it is likely that the US government will do so. They can mobilize the US evangelicals in favor of this step, putting enormous pressure on Congress and the executive. Many Iranian expatriates are extremely wealthy and well connected, and they want such military action. And, firms like Halliburton, which find work-arounds allowing them to make money in Iran (and did so when Dick Cheney was CEO), would love to get rid of the mullas so they could make the big bucks, and more straightforwardly. So it isn't that AIPAC can snap its fingers and make something happen in Washington. But it can put together powerful coalitions and leverage its influence through policy allies, which does tend to make things happen.
I don't personally believe that the Iraq war has been good for Israel in reality, since there is now a great deal of instability on Israel's front porch, and the Fallujans have already declared solidarity with Hamas. I don't think US military action against Iran would be good for anyone, since it would further destabilize the Persian Gulf (the high oil prices, by the way, can't be good for the Israeli economy).
But American politics has become so dominated by single-issue lobbies that they far outweigh the concerns of a mere voter. | | | | dangerousdna | | | | Ilana_Halevy | | Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 6:44 pm Post subject: |
| | dandanana, you get paid from Saudis for posting here? | | | | dangerousdna | | Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:19 pm Post subject: |
| Spy-scandal lobby blitz
AIPAC secures wide backing after secrets charges
http://www.thehill.com/news/090804/spy.aspx
Lobbyists for an influential pro-Israel group launched into
congressional overdrive when trails of a Pentagon spy scandal led to
their Washington office.
Soon after media outlets reported on the scandal late last month,
American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) lobbyists and their
political liaisons across the country asked Democratic and Republican
lawmakers to issue public statements in support of America's premier
pro-Israel group.
That intense and frantic lobbying effort, which began on the eve of
the GOP convention and continued unabated in New York, led dozens of
lawmakers of both parties to testify to AIPAC's integrity before they
had been briefed by the FBI investigators on the details of the case.
Some lawmakers, however, stressed that they rose to AIPAC's defense
without any prompting from the group.
The FBI is reportedly investigating whether Pentagon analyst Larry
Franklin passed sensitive intelligence to Israel and the role of two
AIPAC employees in the matter.
AIPAC had deployed bipartisan statements in a successful campaign to
quell the potentially disastrous flow of negative articles in the
first cycle of an espionage scandal that FBI investigators say is
expanding.
That bipartisan support has also immunized AIPAC from political
attacks that question the pro-Israel group's patriotism and has
shielded it from the crossfire of a
presidential campaign.
"As much as we've reached out to members of Congress, they are
reaching out to us," said Josh Block, a spokesman for AIPAC.
"Clearly, expressions of support from leaders of both parties in both
chambers are extremely important and reflect the deep and abiding
relationship between the U.S. and Israel, and the strong relationship
between AIPAC and members of Congress," Block said.
Dozens of key lawmakers from both parties have been briefed by AIPAC
Executive Director Howard Kohr, say numerous congressional aides. In
addition, prominent Jewish community leaders across the country —
many of whom are serious donors — have been phoning their friends on
Capitol Hill, denouncing the allegation that a Pentagon mole slipped
classified documents to AIPAC as the scurrilous work of an FBI
zealot.
The briefings from the Washington office have been limited to a
detailed rebuttal of AIPAC's alleged role in receiving classified
material from Franklin, followed by a pitch for statements of
support, say aides.
AIPAC's Washington briefers have shied away from addressing the
broader charges against Franklin, or any other possible allegation
about the Pentagon leaking drafts of its Iran policy.
But Kohr has made himself very clear that a public statement about
AIPAC's integrity would be appreciated, while a more forceful, if
less tactful, play for congressional support has come in phone calls
from Jewish political leaders across the country, say congressional
aides for members contacted by AIPAC.
In many cases, AIPAC lobbyists have been very specific about how they
wanted the lawmakers' statements to be phrased. But in other
instances, requests have been made in general terms, asking only for
a public expression of support.
AIPAC, which does not give political donations but spends roughly $1
million a year on lobbying, has received supportive statements from
nearly every key congressional leader.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), said, "I know AIPAC. I
know the AIPAC leadership. It is an outstanding organization."
Those comments were similar to Sen. Arlen Specter's (R-Pa.) words: "I
know AIPAC. I know its integrity. It's a smear."
Democrats were no less effusive in their backing of the embattled
group. Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) said, "For more
than five decades, America as a country and Americans as individuals
have stood by Israel. AIPAC and its members have tirelessly led that
effort, and America is better and stronger for it. It is vital work —
work I know AIPAC will continue to lead effectively."
Over on the House side, Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.)
offered a general statement of support. "AIPAC has played a pivotal
role in ensuring the strength of the special relationship between the
United States and Israel," she said. "AIPAC is a dedicated advocate
for Israel, educating our nation's leaders about opportunities to
assist our democratic ally in the Middle East. I am proud to have
worked closely with AIPAC and its leaders to support Israel as it
works to defeat terrorism and strives toward a just and lasting
peace."
Most of lawmakers' statements avoided the specific charges. Rather,
they framed their support for AIPAC in general terms.
House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) was one of the few Republican
lawmakers to mention the charges. "While the House will want to look
carefully at any allegations that might endanger our national
security, it will begin that look with a record of great confidence
in our relationship with AIPAC and our strongest ally and the only
democracy in the Middle East, Israel," Blunt said.
But Rep. John Conyers (Mich.), the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary
Committee, gave an indication of how the FBI probe might be
politicized on Capitol Hill. In a letter to Rep. James Sensenbrenner
(R-Wis.), chairman of the committee, Conyers asked for a formal
congressional investigation.
"It now appears that these allegations may be only the tip of the
iceberg of a broader effort of the Pentagon employees working in the
office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Douglas Feith, to
conduct unauthorized covert activities, without the knowledge of the
Central Intelligence Agency," Conyers wrote.
Republicans, however, cautioned that Democrats would suffer political
consequences if they sought to demonize or slur AIPAC, especially in
conjunction with the Iraq war.
733 Fifteenth Street, NW Suite 1140
Washington, DC 20005
202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Sep 18, 2004 9:33 pm Post subject: AIPAC's Power, or America's Cowardice? |
| AIPAC's Power, or America's Cowardice?
http://www.antiwar.com/reese/?articleid=3551
by Charley Reese
It was 1996, and Bill Clinton was president. To give the rascal his due, he
was laboring mightily to make the Middle East peace process work. That same
year, three American neoconservatives produced a policy paper for the newly
elected Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
The neocons were Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser. Their
policy paper recommended to Netanyahu that he abandon the peace process,
reject "land for peace" and strengthen Israel's defenses in order to
confront Syria and Iraq. The document said, "This effort can focus on
removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic
objective in its own right." It also recommended that Israel use pretexts
for preemptive attacks.
Now, if all of this sounds familiar – and it should – that's because Perle,
Feith and Wurmser joined other neocons in the Bush administration. Perle was
especially vocal in pushing the war on Iraq. They had two pretexts: the
attack of Sept. 11, even though Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with it,
and the mythical weapons of mass destruction.
Netanyahu, by the way, did abandon the peace process. And, at a cost of $200
billion and nearly 1,000 American lives, Israel did achieve its "strategic
objective in its own right" – removing Saddam from power. Unless Perle and
his buddies were paid for their advice, it didn't cost Israel one shekel or
one life.
Furthermore, if you stretch your memory, you will recall that until Iraq
blew up in its face, the Bush administration was laying the groundwork to
attack Syria, the other country Perle and his crowd named as a target for
Israel. It has already imposed sanctions on Syria despite the fact that,
according to our own intelligence people, Syria had been cooperating with
the war on terror. The other target of the Israelis – excuse me, the Bush
administration – is Iran.
If you want more details on these neocons, I recommend Secrets and Lies,by
Dilip Hiro, a distinguished Middle East scholar, and James Bamford's A
Pretext for War.
When President Bush first started talking about terrorism, he use to say
"terrorists with global reach" to distinguish between al-Qaeda and strictly
local outfits with local agendas. That did not suit the Israelis and their
American supporters. They wanted Israel's enemies to be our enemies, and so
the distinction was soon dropped, and Israel's enemies were added to the
official list of terrorist organizations.
The problem is that Hamas and Islamic Jihad are Palestinian organizations
fighting for independence. True, they have used terrorist tactics, just as
the Jewish organizations – the Stern Gang and the Irgun – did when they were
fighting the British occupation of Palestine. But their target is the
Israeli occupation, not us.
Hezbollah is a Lebanese organization that has also used terrorist tactics,
including attacks against Americans in Lebanon, when it figured we were
helping the Israelis in their occupation of Lebanon. But there again, its
quarrel is with Israel.
I have long since given up the hope that Americans would wake up and resent
the manipulation of their government by a foreign country. The Israeli lobby
has been so successful in labeling any criticism of Israel, no matter how
justified, as anti-Semitic that most Americans prefer to stick their heads
in the sand. For sure, American politicians and much of the media seem to be
terrified by the Israeli lobby, which says more about their cowardice than
it does about the power of the lobby itself.
So, suit yourself. Go ahead and spend American blood and treasure for the
benefit of Israel.
Just remember, the United States has one, and only one, legitimate interest
in the Middle East, and that is buying oil that everybody who has it wants
to sell. It doesn't matter whether we buy it from a dictator (we bought
plenty from Saddam) or from a democratic government. It doesn't matter to us
if the country that sells us oil likes or hates Israel.
This whole mess, including the war in Iraq and the terrorist attacks, is a
result of the American government's involvement with Israel. It's a
dangerous and unhealthy state of affairs that will not be cured until
Americans find the courage to have an open and honest debate about our
foreign policy in the Middle East. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 2:28 pm Post subject: Neo-Con Spies |
| http://english.daralhayat.com/opinion/OPED/09-2004/Article-20040920-1bc4b472-c0a8-01ed-0029-df8a5e8869e0/story.html
(Neo-Con Spies)
Jihad Al Khazen Al-Hayat 2004/09/20
As of today, I will be discussing the neo-conservatives' spying for Israel, based on the interrogation of Lawrence Franklin, an analyst at the Defense Intelligence Agency who belongs to the Israeli gang, and who allegedley passed highly classified draft documents regarding the United States policy towards Iran to two members of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman.
For the past two years, the FBI has been investigating information about AIPAC receiving secret U.S. documents and transferring them to Israel. This came prior to Franklin's affair, whose name appeared within a wide investigation about spying for Israel. It seems that the FBI caught Franklin while tapping AIPAC's activity.
Rosen and Weissman acted in a way that confirmed the accusation, as while they were being questioned by the FBI, they suddenly stopped talking and asked for their lawyers.
The accused found no one to defend them other than Likudnik extremists, such as warmonger Michael Ledeen, who decided that there was no essence for the accusation, as if he knew what the investigators did not find out over two years. They also received support from the national director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) Abraham Foxman, who insolently demanded that the source who leaked this information to the press be investigated, as spying for Israel is less important than protecting the U.S. secrets from falling in the hands of Israel's spies; in fact, the leaking aimed at stopping the investigation, because Franklin cooperated with the investigators.
This complicated issue tackles the stealing of the drafts of the President's instructions, stealing sensitive wiretapped information from the National Security Agency, the activity of Douglas Feith's office, his dealing with the Iraqi National Congress (INC) in order to create or exaggerate information, and leak the name of CIA agent Valery Plame to the press, as well as falsifying documents concerning Iraq's attempt to buy uranium from Nigeria …In sum, all the lies that led to the war on Iraq, which did not end yet, and is causing the death of young American soldiers everyday.
The wide investigation rapidly discovered Steven Green, who is among the best who wrote about spying for Israel. When FBI agents asked to meet him, he thought they were seeking information about Franklin; however, he discovered that the investigators had already launched a wide campaign, and wanted details about Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Stephen Bryen, Douglas Feith, and other neo-cons in the Pentagon Office of Special Plans (OSP).
The reader will see these names repeated throughout my study, and will discover that the new accusations have been repeated for decades, without ending in a condemnation. I relied on information from Green and other American experts in the field.
I hold the neo-cons accountable for the death of more than 1,000 Americans, as well as 2,000 Iraqis, and ask for their trial. I also think that the current investigation will not lead to any accusations or trials, and the neo-cons will keep spying for Israel, to whom they are loyal.
I will reveal in my upcoming columns that the neo-cons have been accused over and over again of leaking secret information to Israel; but every time, the investigation was halted. The only exception is the case of Jonathan Pollard, which was too obvious to be dissimulated; as Pollard was stupid enough to carry the secret documents in suitcases and brag about his spying, until he paid the price.
I will provide the reader with a list of accusations directed to neo-cons like Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Michael Ledeen and others, and which go back to the 1960s until today. The reader will realize that history repeats itself; AIPAC received secret documents in the past, a thing that created a chaos, which was soon tamed, without anyone being held accountable.
This happened when the Secretary of Justice was not yet John Ashcroft, the reborn-Christian who believes that Israel's victory is necessary in order for the world to be destroyed by the Antichrist, so that the real savior would come back and rescue the world.
I believe that the current investigation will end just like the previous ones did, but I wish I could be wrong. I do not think there is a conspiracy theory here, as one of the conditions of a conspiracy theory is secrecy, and the neo-cons, be they members of the administration, academics, or journalists, openly declare their stances. While they all agree on the goal, they differ in the type of work and the amount of effort.
The issue I am discussing today might be the biggest neo-cons gathering, as well as the most dangerous, knowing the importance of the Department of Defense, where Paul Wolfowitz is Deputy Secretary, and Douglas Feith is under-Secretary of Defense for Policy, i.e. the two most important men in the Pentagon after Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
What is built on error could only lead to error. The neo-cons worked within the DoD in order to implement their old policy against Iraq through the OSP, which was established by the Secretary of Defense and his Deputy in order to provide information about a link between Saddam Hussein's regime and Al Qaeda. We know today that the American official investigations denied the existence of such a relation; however, the neo-cons promoted its existence, like they promoted the existence of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), without having certified information on both. Their accusations were based on information given by Iraqi excommunicates who flee their country under the supervision of opposition members who wanted to topple Saddam Hussein's regime; this is enough of a reason to doubt any word they utter.
Pro-Israeli DoD officials did not complain about such unreliable information, as they suited their desires.
Douglas Feith supervised the OSP as well as the DoD's Near East and South Asia bureau (NESA); the first was headed by Abraham Shulsky, and the second by William Luti. Among others who worked with them was Michael Robin, a Middle East "expert" who belongs to the same gang, and who came via the neo-cons' nest, American Enterprises; there is also David Shenker of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), as well as Michael Makovsky, whose brother David Makovsky is a WINEP member, and former editor-in-chief of the Likudnik Jerusalem Post.
Nobody could even claim that all those Jewish Americans (Israelis) found themselves at the same place by coincidence, that all of them erred in evaluating intelligence information also by coincidence, and that they exaggerated or lied about this information in order to push the U.S. into a war where the number of American victims exceeded the 1,000 this month, also by coincidence. I continue tomorrow. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 2:41 pm Post subject: Neo-Con Spies II |
| Jihad Al Khazen Al-Hayat 2004/09/21
http://english.daralhayat.com/opinion/OPED/09-2004/Article-20040921-2213d9cd-c0a8-01ed-000b-9a72e21d81ba/story.html
(Neo-Con Spies II)
The strangest thing in the scandal of spying for
Israel is the existence of a scandal in the first
place; the people involved in it have been accused of
spying for Israel for decades. The scandal is that
they are allowed to be in key positions within the
U.S. administration, after having been subject to
investigations that are exactly like the current one,
concerning the accusation of leaking secret
information to Israel.
Douglas Feith is a famous extremist who does not
deserve to be in a high-ranking position within the
Department of Defense (DoD); while we know about his
objection to all peace negotiations in the Middle
East, including the Oslo Accords, he publicly opposed
the Biological Weapons Convention (in 1986), the
Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (in 1988), the
Chemical Weapons Convention (in 1997), the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (in 2000). He wrote an
article in Commentary magazine in 1992 saying: "It is
in the interest of U.S. and Israel to remove needless
impediments to technological cooperation between them.
Technologies in the hands of responsible, friendly
countries facing military threats, countries like
Israel, serve to deter aggression, enhance regional
stability and promote peace thereby."
This statement justifies spying, as it means that the
U.S. must provide military technology to Israel, in
order to impose its hegemony and "peace" on the people
of the region. However, Israel is an expansionist
racist country, which must not be given any weapons,
as it sold the American technology to China, as well
as to others. More important than all of this is that
Feith's statement uncovers the way neo-conservatives
think about providing Israel with the secrets of
America's technology, a thing that explains Lawrence
Franklin's affair, who works with Feith, and who gave
secret documents to two workers from the Israeli
lobby. Neo-cons consider everything the U.S. possesses
to be "legitimate" for Israel to possess as well,
despite the fact that the American "spy law" clearly
forbids the transfer of information between one party
and another.
It might be that Franklin was inspired by his boss
Feith to transfer secret documents. In 1982, Feith was
expelled from his position at the National Security
Council, after he was subject to an investigation
concerning his leaking of secret information to an
official at the Israeli Embassy in Washington.
However, Richard Perle, who was DoD Assistant
Secretary for International Security Policy (ISP) back
then, joined Feith to himself in ISP as his Special
Counsel, and then as Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Negotiations Policy. Feith left the department in
1986, in order to establish a law firm in Israel with
his Israeli partner.
Once again, it should not have been allowed for an
accused of the type of Feith to be appointed a key
position in the American administration during the
1980s or today. But his story with Perle reminds us of
a story which hero, or anti-hero, is Stephen Bryen.
In April of 1979, Deputy Assistant Attorney General
Robert Keuch recommended in writing that Bryen, then a
staff member of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, undergo a grand jury hearing to establish
the basis for a prosecution for espionage. The issue
is known, as I heard it from my friend Michael Saba at
the Madison Hotel, while he was showing secret
documents to a visiting Israeli official. This also
occurred in the presence of the director of AIPAC, or
the Jewish lobby. It turned out that the official was
Zvi Rafiah, the Mossad station chief in Washington. A
friend of Bryen testified that she heard him talking
to Rafiah in his office about secret documents (some
of which referring to Saudi military bases). Bryen was
not convicted because the Committee on Foreign
Relations refused to give the Department of Justice
the required documents that Bryen wanted to leak to
Israel, and asked for him to resign from his position
in the committee.
Believe it or not, this man who is accused of spying,
found his way to an even more sensitive position. In
1981, Richard Perle was appointed DoD Assistant
Secretary for International Security Policy (ISP); he
hired Bryen as his Deputy, which requires giving the
latter the permission to view secret documents. When
Perle was faced with this issue during the Congress
investigation to fix him in his position, he said: I
consider Dr. Bryen to be a completely honest man, and
I fully trust his values and patriotism.
It is an Israeli patriotism like that of Perle, as the
new employees have loyalty to Israel only. Bryen
remained faithful to his Israeli patriotism, as in the
year 1988, Israel needed spare parts for its Arrow
Missile, which were of the most important secret
American technology that was not available for
exporting. But Bryen asked the DoD for a permission
for Varian Associates, Inc. to export the parts to
Israel. All high-ranking officials of the department
refused to give their consent, and Bryen said that he
will ask the Israelis why they needed these parts in
specific. He came back to say that he received a
convincing reply, and that he would issue the
permission of exportation. But what happened at the
end was that the Depute Secretary of Defense Richard
Armitage, who is the current Depute Secretary of
State, sent a letter to Bryen asking him to inform the
State Department of the "complete refusal" of the DoD
to export. Bryen was obliged to withdraw the license,
and Varian Associates, Inc. became the first company
banned from contracts with the DoD.
The reader might have noticed that Perle's name was
repeated during the talk about the activities of Feith
and Bryen; he was an Israeli collaborator from the
first and until today. Perle worked for Senator Henry
(Scoop) Jackson in 1969; not a year had passed until
the axis of the investigation about leaking a secret
report to the CIA about claimed special Soviet
armament treaties. He officially asked Senator Jackson
to expel Perle, but was content with reproaching him.
A year went by and Perle was subject to a new
investigation, as the FBI was tapping the phone calls
of the Israeli embassy, and they recorded a phone call
where Perle was preparing for providing them with
secret information. Perle was subject to financial
questionings throughout his professional life, for
receiving a consultant salary for the Israeli Tamaris
SA Group which produces arms in 1981, and receiving
millions of dollars in 2004 from Hollinger, via his
Likudnik friend Conrad Black.
It would be funny for Perle to fall for the last time
in a financial affair, after he has worked for Israel
for over four decades, and helped in guiding the
American policy to harm the American interests, and
ended up in Iraq with thousands of casualties from
young Americans, without having a cause to defend; I
continue tomorrow. | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
