A federal court authorized issuance of subpoenas to more than a dozen
current and former government officials to testify in the case of two
former officials of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee who
are accused of unauthorized receipt, transmission and disclosure of
classified information.
According to the defense, the testimony of the subpoenaed officials
will show that the defendants did "nothing more than the
well-established official Washington practice of engaging in 'back
channel' communication with various non-governmental entities and
persons for the purpose of advancing U.S. foreign policy goals."
The government disputes that claim and says such testimony is
irrelevant to whether the defendants engaged in a conspiracy to obtain
and disclose classified information.
The court, however, ruled that circumstantial evidence of the official
use of "back channel" communications could be probative of the
defendants' state of mind and could show a lack of criminal intent.
Judge T.S. Ellis III therefore authorized issuance of subpoenas to the
following officials:
Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State (then-National Security Advisor)
Richard Armitage, former Deputy Secretary of State
William Burns, U.S. Ambassador to Russia
Marc Grossman, former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs
Lawrence Silverman, Deputy Chief of Mission of the U.S. Embassy to the
Slovak Republic
Matthew Bryza, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
Marc Sievers, Political Officer, U.S. Embassy to Israel
David Satterfield, Senior Advisor to the Secretary of State and
Coordinator for Iraq (then-Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau
of Near Eastern Affairs)
Stephen Hadley, National Security Advisory (then-Deputy National
Security Advisory)
Elliot Abrams, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National
Security Advisory for Global Democracy Strategy Affairs
Kenneth Pollack, former Director for Persian Gulf Affairs for the
National Security Council
Paul Wolfowitz, former Deputy Secretary of Defense
Douglas Feith, former Undersecretary of Defense
Michael Makovsky, former employee of the Office of the Secretary of
Defense, Office of Near East and South Asia
Lawrence Franklin, former Department of Defense employee
A copy of the November 2, 2007 Memorandum Opinion in the case of United
States of America v. Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman is available
here:
    http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/aipac/memop110207.pdf
                                                 
The Lawrence Franklin espionage scandal (also known as the AIPAC espionage scandal) refers to allegations that information regarding United States policy towards Iran was passed to Israel through Lawrence Franklin via staffers affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Franklin, a former Defense Department employee, has pleaded guilty to several espionage-related charges and was sentenced in January 2006 to nearly thirteen years of prison. Two former AIPAC employees have also been indicted.
The investigation and prosecutions, which began in 1999, have attracted attention because critics of U.S. Israeli policy have claimed AIPAC has served as a conduit for Israel’s spying efforts with near impunity due to its powerful connections in Washington. Franklin's indictment mentioned but did not name several foreign diplomats, widely believed to be Israeli, as being involved with his efforts.
more at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Franklin_espionage_scandal
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 39
Thank God the Judge sees the writing on the wall.
Yeah, to hell with common sense, diplomacy, lessons learned, and ethics...
Flip that baby to automatic and let God sort 'em out !
Israel, also, has a nuclear arsenal. In a report entitled "The Third Temple's Holy of Holies: Israel's Nuclear Weapons," U.S. Army Col. Warner Farr said Israel's nuclear arsenal has grown from an estimated 13 nuclear bombs in 1967 to 400 nuclear and thermonuclear weapons. Farr said Israel's navy could deploy nuclear weapons on the fleet of three German-built Dolphin-class diesel submarines.
At least Pakistan isn't spying on us while passing itself off as our' ally.
My concern with this case is not so much the Israeli' aspect, but, rather...the American's who acted as enablers. What involvement, if any, did Douglas Feith and Paul Wolfowitz have in the spying. The exact charges are:
"On August 4, a federal grand jury indicted Franklin on five charges of violating the Espionage Act of 1917:
One count of conspiracy to communicate national defense information to people not entitled to receive it. (18 USC 793)
Three counts of communicating national defense information to people not entitled to receive it. (18 USC 793)
One count of conspiring to communicate national defense information to an agent of a foreign government. (50 US 783, 18 USC 731)
Rosen was further charged with one count each of the first two, and Weissman with one count of the first charge.
The indictment revealed that the investigation had been going on since 1999, and suggested that other individuals at AIPAC, the Defense Department and the Israeli embassy had been involved as well.
Nations will spy on each...fine, but, I want to know if any Americans were spying for Israel. To me this would be treason.
There is also concern:
...About Uncontrolled Military Technology Transfers
Journalist Jim Lobe suggests that the Franklin story is part of a larger investigation into transfer of sensitive military and dual-use technologies to Israel, including powerful case-management software. A concern is that Israeli companies 'have' sold on sensitive U.S.-derived technology to potential U.S. strategic rivals such as Russia and China, and possibly on the black market where it can potentially be obtained by terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIPAC_espionage_scandal
A great criminal defense (back channel): "We do it all the time".
"In 2008, as in previous election years, serious candidates for the highest office in the land will go to considerable lengths to express their deep personal commitment to one foreign country...Israel...as well as their determination to maintain unyielding U.S. support for the Jewish state. Each candidate will emphasize that he or she fully appreciates the multitude of threats facing Israel and make it clear that, if elected, the United States will remain firmly committed to defending Israel's interests under any and all circumstances. None of the candidates is likely to criticize Israel in any significant way or suggest that the United States ought to pursue a more evenhanded policy in the region. Any who do will probably fall by the wayside."
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Political/Dem_Repub_Israel_Lobby.html
I have been through that more than once here on Gather when I mention the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion ... which as far as I am concerned are very much indicative of what is actually going on in the shadows where world leaders who wish to remain anonymous are maneuvering for control to this very day ... those papers telling the story of what has been on "their" (leave the Jew bit out of it, it is not needed because it is the dark side of all human nature that the essence speaks to) minds for a very long time now and they believe nearing fruition ... those who go along with the PC line that it was all a contrived attack on Jews by the Russians and therefore should never again see the light of day are truly opening themselves up to be slaves ... read them leaving aside the nationalities as see if they do not speak to what is probably going on yet.
I have nothing against Jewish people it's the policies of Israel that I have issues with. I can criticize the government of, say, Sierra Leone or Peru or Indonesia...but, don't criticize Israel.
And I say, Why the hell not...what makes them so special?
Most people cannot seem to separate being Jewish with Zionism ... there is overlap but they are not at all the same thing ... the protocols are about Zionism (supposedly) but really about a group of people regardless of any other distinction other than greed for power and control of this entire world ... and the very long range plan they have for that ... it so hits home being the essence of that truth, that 'they' have stopped at nothing to discredit our knowing about it all ..."they" have went to great lengths to discredit all conspiracy theories and making the average person that suggests that there are conspiracies suffer great disparagement from their peers who believe the line that those who control us put out. Ridicule is very powerful for weak ego's ...
MyHotComments
"No one took seriously the defense's motion, made a few months ago, that they be allowed to subpoena Condoleezza Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, National Security Council chief Stephen Hadley, and a whole platoon of government officials and former officials. The motion was made on the grounds that these officials, too, had transmitted classified information to AIPAC, and that this is proof that such behavior was and is routine, part of the normal way of doing business in the world of Washington lobbyists. The defendants' case has always been that they have a First Amendment right to commit espionage, and that their indictment amounted to a government assault on their right to "free speech." Gee, too bad the Rosenbergs never thought of this unique rationalization for treason, although I doubt it would've gotten them anywhere. The AIPAC defendants, however, may have more luck in this department…
No judge had ever allowed such a thing, at least in recent memory, and no one expected Judge Ellis to look favorably on this request. That he granted the defense motion in all but a few cases is bad news for the government – and good news for the Israel lobby, which may just be spared the embarrassment of having its essential nature as a fifth column for Israel exposed to the light of day.
In addition to Rice, Wolfowitz, and Hadley, the following can expect to be served with a summons to appear at a trial that may never happen: Larry Franklin's boss, Douglas J. Feith, former undersecretary of defense for policy; Elliott Abrams, neocon par excellence and Iran-Contra alumnus, who served as Bush's "deputy national security adviser for global democracy strategy"; Kenneth Pollack, a former National Security Council adviser to Bill Clinton and author of the now infamously influential book The Threatening Storm, which convinced so many liberal Democrats to support the invasion of Iraq; Marc Grossman, former undersecretary of state for political affairs; Marc Sievers, chief political affairs officer at the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv and one of Rice's chief advisers on Iraqi affairs; David Satterfield, a political officer at our Tel Aviv embassy; William Burns, the American ambassador to Russia; Lawrence Silverman, currently a deputy chief at the American embassy in the Slovak Republic; Matthew Bryza, a deputy assistant secretary of state; and Michael Makovsky, a former staff member of the Office of Special Plans, the policy shop where the "intelligence" pointing to Saddam Hussein's fabled "weapons of mass destruction" was cooked up into talking points. Franklin also served in that policy shop.
The idea that the U.S. government is going to allow this is absurd. Rather than expose the entire Israeli covert operation in its midst and permit testimony that would dramatize how much access the Israelis already have to our officials and the policy-making process, the Bush administration now has an ideal excuse to shut this case down. Rice wouldn't even show up to a congressional hearing to answer questions about prewar intelligence, and she similarly tried to defy the 9/11 Commission on the grounds of "executive privilege." In spite of her expressed willingness to "cooperate with our legal system," I fully expect her to show the same disdain for Judge Ellis' court."
more at: http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=11856
"Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." - Menachem Begin.
On the actual topic, I feel this Justin fellow, and apparently many others, err in their assessment of the matter. There is this odd "halfway" logic that seems quite seductive. On the one hand, a great fraud and manipulation of the nation, and indeed the world, is granted. Yet, there is this, in my mind, unrealistic belief that things ought to be handled as if this were not the case.
If things are so bad that our "keepers" can blatantly, and almost openly, betray the very security of the country they are entrusted to insure, business as usual will not proceed as usual. No trial which would expose clearly the nature and means of the big lies would have been allowed, if it will not now be allowed. If the judge saw that, he has done what he is sworn to do; Get as close to the truth as he can, by means of his authority in that court.
By allowing those subpoenas, he declares the issue in a way that the law demands, and so brings the names of those who stand behind the suspect's actions, right or wrong, into the scope of the trial. Actions to quash testimony are now linked to those names.
Will this actually pan out, as in, lead to folks taking an oath and speaking of these matters openly? I doubt it. But every refusal to do so is a piece of evidence in another court, that of public opinion. Something is better than nothing, and right now, we certainly need every something we can get.