WASHINGTON, 25 September 2004 — A news story is currently circulating in the US press titled “The Spies Who Aren’t.”
It refers to the Larry Franklin/AIPAC/Israeli spy scandal story that broke on CBS news a couple of weeks ago. Now that Dan Rather and CBS have lost most of their credibility due to their admission that they made a mistake on Bush Air National Guard story, the Israeli spy story appears to be losing out also. The logic is something like this. CBS can no longer be trusted on “breaking news”, so their story on Israeli espionage can’t be trusted either.
The pro-Israeli PR machine is hard at work these days trying to recover from the stories of spying on the US through Larry Franklin, an official of the US Department of Defense, and AIPAC, the main pro-Israeli lobbying organization in the US When columnist Joel Mowbray, widely known as an Israeli apologist, wrote his syndicated column, “The Spies Who Aren’t”, he stated that the material that Franklin allegedly gave to AIPAC which, in turn, was given to Israel, was “nothing more than a policy paper — just a few pages that resembled an opinion-editorial”, so what’s the big deal. In fact, Franklin and many other friends of Israel in the US media are now “blaming the victim” by stating that those who exposed the Franklin/AIPAC case are really anti-Semites out to destroy the US relationship with Israel.
In his twisted logic, Mowbray maintains that the fact that the press generally doesn’t point out that Franklin is not Jewish, is, in itself, anti-Semitic.
So the story that the Israeli espionage case is dead and AIPAC will rise from the ashes even stronger is true, right? Not necessarily.
Various American Jewish publications are currently attacking the senior FBI counterintelligence official heading the AIPAC probe, David Szady, as — you guessed it — anti-Semitic. Szady led an investigation a few years ago regarding a CIA attorney who happened to be Jewish and this appears to be the basis of the pro-Israeli press attack on Szady.
However, although Szady heads the counterterrorism FBI unit, he also is an expert on illegal technology transfer.
Possibly Szady is investigating something more serious than just a “policy paper that resembled an opinion-editorial” that was given to the Israelis.
And if one reads all the news about the Israeli spy scandal, you will find many accounts that indicate that this probe has been conducted for two years or more and it is looking at much more than just Franklin and the “policy paper.”
In addition to the official probe, AIPAC is also on the radar screen of various other groups in the US for additional indiscretions. A recent public opinion poll, which was commissioned by the Council for the National Interest (CNI), showed that a majority of American citizens of all ages and backgrounds strongly believe that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) acts as a foreign agent for the Israeli government. And a group of former US diplomats is reviving a legal suit which asks the US Federal Election Commission (FEC) to require AIPAC to register and report its finances as lobbying funds, something that is not currently required of the pro-Israeli organization.
Zogby International, a highly respected polling firm, following the publication of reports about AIPAC being investigated for espionage activities for Israel, reported that 61 percent of Americans “strongly or somewhat agree” that AIPAC should be required to register as a foreign agent and lose its tax exempt status.
Only 12 percent disagree with this premise. Eugene Bird, a former US diplomat and president of CNI which commissioned the study commented, “The poll shows serious doubts that Americans have about the activities of AIPAC. They strongly endorse the position that we have long held, that AIPAC should register as an agent of a foreign government and lose its tax-exempt status. For years, Congress has been duped by their illegal activities.”
CNI points out that AIPAC considers itself an American pro-Israeli lobbying group, directly involved in affecting the US relationship with Israel, and is considered the main power behind the $3 billion of annual US aid to Israel.
In the late 1980s another group of former US diplomats filed a request to the Federal Election Commission, FEC, asking that lobbying groups that contribute to political campaigns be required to comply with federal rules requiring them to disclose how their money is collected and spent.
This FEC filing which was led by former ambassadors James Aikens and Andrew Kilgore, focused on AIPAC and its activities. It was dismissed by the FEC but the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals on appeal ruled that the pro-Israeli lobbying group should be classified as a political action committee and forced to disclose its financial dealings because it spent more than $1000 a year on campaigns.
The appeals court rejected an FEC view that only groups whose “major purpose” is the election of a candidate be covered. The FEC has said that requiring a group such as AIPAC, whose mission is primarily advocacy, to disclose its financial dealings would violate free speech rights.
In 1998 the FEC case eventually went to the US Supreme Court which primarily dealt with the case on threshold legal problems and finally sent the case back to the FEC. In light of recent developments regarding AIPAC activities, the original group filing suit with the FEC has decided to revive the case.
Ambassador Andrew Kilgore stated, “Someone has to get AIPAC to account for its improper and possibly illegal activities. If Congress and the press won’t take them on, we will”.
So all is not rosy for AIPAC and the pro-Israeli lobby despite stories to the contrary and the inaction of Congress on the issue. And maybe the spies who aren’t, really are.
— Dr. Michael Saba is the author of “The Armageddon Network” and is an international relations consultant.
