A Spy in the Defense Dept.

(Note: the Office of Special Plans was set up in the Pentagon, because key figures in Bush’s Defense Department -Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etc- and vice president Dick Cheney didn’t like the “balanced” intelligence on Iraqi WMD coming from the CIA and other established intelligence sources… so these clowns started their own intelligence office to gather and shape intelligence, which was then used to justify invading Iraq. See the 9-11 commission report, for more info on the “Office of Special Plans”)

FBI probes DOD office
By Richard Sale
UPI Intelligence Correspondent

The FBI has intensified its investigation of senior members of what was formerly known as the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans on suspicion that one of them passed highly classified U.S. military information to the government of Israel, according to federal law enforcement officials.

In some cases, colleagues, former associates and members of other government agencies have been interviewed as many as four times by teams of FBI agents, FBI officials told United Press International.

Two of the people interviewed are Bill Luti, former chief of OSP, and Harold Rhode of the Near East/South Asia office, according to participants in the investigation.

The OSP, an intelligence unit, was set up by the No. 3 man in the Pentagon, Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, according to retired Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, who was a staffer in the office from June 2002 through March 2003.

Luti, a former Navy captain, switched to the Pentagon from Vice President Richard Cheney’s staff, according to a congressional investigative memo.

According to other congressional memos, Luti was made deputy undersecretary and reported directly to Feith.

Luti also presided over the NESA office that worked closely with OSP “with sometimes an interchangeable staff,” according to one congressional memo described the OSP “as a loose group of acolytes and hired hands” for Cheney, and (Cheney’s chief of staff) I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Feith – all “performing a mixture of intelligence, planning and other unspecified operational duties in support of preordained policy.”

According to Kwiatkowski, Luti was a “name-dropper, who often referred to deadlines and assignments coming from ‘Scooter.’”

Pentagon spokesman, Lt. Col Chris Conway, told UPI that neither Luti nor Rhode had been interviewed or polygraphed by the FBI nor had their bosses alerted them that they were the subjects of an investigation.

A federal law enforcement official was not surprised. He said, “Any target of an investigation is the last person we would talk to. The fact that subjects haven’t been approached is part of normal investigative procedure.”

Rhode, another prominent official of the NESA office, also works for the Office of Net Assessment, Pentagon officials said.

According to one federal law enforcement official, Rhode and Luti and other OSP officials have been frequently mentioned in FBI interviews, “chiefly the nature and extent of his contacts with Israel,” according to federal law enforcement officials.

A Pentagon spokesman said Rhode has been working for Net Assessment “for the last 10 years.”

A former very senior CIA official told United Press International that Rhode recently had his security clearances lifted.

In an e-mail to UPI, Rhode denied this. “I have never had my security clearances revoked or canceled.”

At least three former CIA officials told UPI that in 1998 Rhode had his clearances suspended, based on allegations he had given classified information to Israel.

In the same e-mail, Rhode denied this as well, adding: “Nor have I been informed that I am under any type of investigation.”

Two former senior U.S. intelligence officials also stated that Rhode is on administrative leave.

However, Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Chris Conway said answering the question about whether or not Rhode is on administrative leave would violate the privacy act and therefore had no comment.

The NESA/OSP office was located on the fourth floor of the Pentagon, D ring, 7th corridor, according to Kwiatkowski, the former staffer.

According to one former senior U.S. intelligence official who maintained excellent contacts with serving U.S. intelligence officials in the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, “Rhode practically lived out of (Ahmad) Chalabi’s office.”

This same source quoted the intelligence official with the CPA as saying, “Rhode was observed by CIA operatives as being constantly on his cell phone to Israel,” and that the information that the intelligence officials overheard him passing to Israel was “mind-boggling,” this source said.

It dealt with U.S. plans, military deployments, political projects, discussion of Iraq assets, and a host of other sensitive topics, the former senior U.S. intelligence official said.

Other members of OSP are also under scrutiny, but federal law enforcement officials declined to confirm additional names furnished them by UPI. Pentagon spokesman Conway said, “We have no knowledge of any probe of particular OSP members.”

Rhode is a close member of an inner circle of senior Bush officials who in the past have had skirmishes with the FBI over allegations that they provided classified information to Israel, several serving and former U.S. intelligence officials said.

FBI spokesman, Bill Carter said, “It has been our long-standing policy not to comment on matters of this type or to confirm or deny the existence of any investigation.”

A great many examples of this was substantiated by Stephen Green, a highly respected author of two books on U.S.-Israeli relations, who, in a February article in Counterpunch, noted that the Pentagon finally downgraded Ledeen’s security clearances from Top Secret-SCI to Secret in the mid-1980s, after an earlier boss, Noel Koch, the Principal Assistant Secretary for International Security Affairs, had urged the FBI to begin a probe of Ledeen, then a consultant on terrorism, for passing classified materials to a foreign country, believed to be Israel. (Green notes that Ledeen “was carried in Agency files as an agent of influence of a foreign government: Israel,” a fact he confirmed for UPI in an interview.

Former agency officials said they knew this to be accurate.

In 2001, Ledeen was hired by Feith to work on contract for the Office of Special Plans, which involved the handling of sensitive materials, Green said, a fact confirmed last week to UPI by congressional investigators.

Yet according to Green, in March 1983, Feith, then a Middle East analyst on the National Security Council, was fired by Judge William Clark, who had replaced Richard Allen as national security adviser, because Feith “had been the object of an inquiry into whether he had provided classified material to an official of the Israeli Embassy in Washington” and that the FBI “had opened an inquiry.”

Former Counterterrorism Chief Vince Cannistraro confirmed that Feith was fired from the NSC for leaking classified data to Israel.

In 1982, Feith went to work for Pentagon official Richard Perle, according to Green and confirmed by U.S. intelligence sources.

Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, who an administration official described as having played a “large role in getting Feith” his current job, was working for the Arms Control and Disarmament agency in 1978 and was the subject of an investigation that alleged he had provided “a classified document on the proposed sale of U.S. weapons to an Arab government to an Israeli government official” via “an AIPAC intermediary,” according to Green. The probe was eventually dropped.

In 1981, Wolfowitz, who was working as head of the State Department Policy Planning Staff, hired Ledeen as a Special Advisor, Green said.

?	?

I hope this means Israel is getting ready to take out Iran’s nuclear reactors.

[quote]doogie wrote:
I hope this means Israel is getting ready to take out Iran’s nuclear reactors.[/quote]

Why, really why?

If Israel or the US on its behalf launches a pre-emptive attack on Iran it has (unlike Iraq) the ability to strike back.

Like North Korea, Iran has started that in the case of a pre-emptive attack it will launch its conventional ballistic missiles at Israel’s nuclear facilities (i.e. reactors and bombs). North Korea has stated that it will attack South Korea and Japan’s nuclear facilities in the case of a pre-emptive attack.

And after that you can just imagine what would come next?

I know some ideologues have a particular fondness for the Mageddon plain and the final battle that will take place there (Armageddon) but personally I don’t.

bluey,

I would be interested in your ideas on how to deal with Iran.

Personally, I believe we are going to have far more difficulty with Iran than North Korea.

After I hear your ideas, we can talk specifics.

Thanks,

JeffR

[quote]bluey wrote:
doogie wrote:
I hope this means Israel is getting ready to take out Iran’s nuclear reactors.

Why, really why?

If Israel or the US on its behalf launches a pre-emptive attack on Iran it has (unlike Iraq) the ability to strike back.

Like North Korea, Iran has started that in the case of a pre-emptive attack it will launch its conventional ballistic missiles at Israel’s nuclear facilities (i.e. reactors and bombs). North Korea has stated that it will attack South Korea and Japan’s nuclear facilities in the case of a pre-emptive attack.

And after that you can just imagine what would come next?

I know some ideologues have a particular fondness for the Mageddon plain and the final battle that will take place there (Armageddon) but personally I don’t.[/quote]

First off, I’m not real sure why you kept mixing in North Korea with Iran. Two different countries, two different situations.

Yes, I would like to see Israel take out Iran’s nuclear capabilities now before they are fully developed. Now is the time, while we have troops on both sides of them just in case they do get to feeling frisky.

I’m not a Christian, and I’m not looking forward to Armageddon, but there are a few problems in the world we need to handle soon, before we are too weak to do anything.

JeffR

Well first and most important I would not let a regional conflict (i.e. Israel vs. Palestine) escalate into a global, forever war. Why would bringing in more parties to the bloodshed solve anything? Was WW1 a good solution to a little regional conflict in the Balkans (e.g. Serbia vs. Austria)? BTW WW1 was precipitated by a terrorist action (i.e. ?the shot heard round the world?) just like the war on terror.

In regards to Iran, Arabia, Turkistan, and the rest of the Muslim world:

30 years ago all were largely secular and nationalistic. Constant outside interference has almost solely managed to forge a dangerous foe, global radical Islam. Maybe more interference of an increasingly violent nature might work to win hearts and minds?

By being a bad guy in the eyes of the Muslim world it gives their leaders the perfect scapegoat. ?Well don?t worry about any domestic problems since we have to defeat the Great Satan first, in fact our domestic problems are caused by the Great Satan!? Without these distractions the failings of their counties would be writ large and reform would quicken. Western politicians play much the same game in using security issues to distract from their failings.

So what do you do? Isolate, separate and avoid and wait for them to collapse upon THEMSELVES. As opposed to collapsing upon US as is happening now (via war, ideology, migrants, economic embargos, higher oil prices, etc). By all means strengthen boarders and mount a good defense, but charging off into God know where really what is the point? it is a band-aid fix to a continuing and escalating problem.

WMD is just a small part of a larger problem. Solving or rather trying to solve it will to nothing to fix the larger problem.

This is largely my line of thinking (below), forget about the specifics he mentions but the message is important i.e. more and more conflict is STUPID and should be avoided if possible (and it is).

http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20040827/index.php
Stupid Is As Stupid Does

Most conspiracy buffs underestimate human stupidity. They see people they consider smart and powerful do stupid things, and they think the people must have some hidden ulterior motive. Surely people in such high positions, they think, couldn’t do something that dumb.

They should read more history. In the first place, lots of people are rich, and some end up in positions of power simply because of the luck of their birth or other circumstances. A position of power does not necessarily mean the person holding it is smart. I could cite a contemporary example, but then some people would accuse me of partisan sniping. Trust me, my contempt for most politicians is nonpartisan.
But history really is a long story of mostly human blunders and some short interludes of brilliance. Nobody wanted World War I, but the leaders of Europe’s major powers blundered into it. By the time they had counted the 10 million dead, it took a patient historian a long time to explain how and why it had happened. Then those same brilliant and smart people concocted a vindictive peace treaty that absolutely guaranteed another war, which came in 1939. Most of the 20th century has been consumed with the consequences of those blunders that led to World War I and all that followed it.
The Palestinian-Israeli conflict? Started by Great Britain and France at the end of World War I. The Kurdish conflict? Ditto. In fact, the modern Middle East was created by a Frenchman and an Englishman without the slightest reference to the wishes of the native people or any natural borders.

And while we still struggle to undo mischief begun in the past century, our leaders are creating mischief that might well occupy our posterity. Here again, what they are doing appears plain stupid on its face.
I’m talking about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. This war-fighting alliance was created at the end of World War II, when it seemed Josef Stalin might send the Red Army charging across Western Europe. Eventually, the Soviet Union formed the Warsaw Pact as a counter to NATO.

When the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union collapsed, not only did Russia withdraw its armed forces from Europe, but the Warsaw Pact was dissolved. At that point, any reason whatsoever for the continued existence of NATO died on the vine. But did the United States disband NATO? Oh, no, it kept NATO alive and has now expanded it right up to Russia’s borders.

Let us hope that the Russians recognize stupidity when they see it. Why should there be a Western war alliance when there is no country in a position to make war on Europe? Only one country, Russia, has the power to be a potential attacker, and so any Russian official must conclude that the retention and expansion of NATO is directly aimed at Russia.

Just recently the idiots in the West admitted the Baltic countries ? Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania ? into NATO. As a very disgruntled Russia defense minister just pointed out, the Baltics are a “consumer of security, not a producer.” These small countries, which share much bad blood with Russia, would be absolutely useless in a future war. They are too small and too close to Russia. The only possible role they could play would be as a launching point for a U.S. attack against Russia.
You say no such attack is contemplated. Precisely ? so why admit three small countries cheek to jowl with Russia to a Western European war-fighting alliance that excludes Russia? And to compound the stupidity, NATO will have warplanes flying patrols along the Russian frontier. For what purpose? Again the irate Russian defense minister has pointed out that four airplanes are not likely to find al-Qaida flying in Russian or Baltic airspace.

What four warplanes do is provide an opportunity for a dangerous accident should they stray into Russian airspace and get shot down. The United States should have disbanded NATO and concentrated its diplomacy on forming a strong relationship with Russia. Instead, it seems to be stupidly intent on playing a dangerous game with a country that is not only justifiably suspicious but still retains very sharp nuclear teeth.

I know I’ve overworked the word “stupidity,” but it is precisely this kind of blundering diplomacy that threatens the peace and prosperity of the world and makes it imperative that the present administration be unceremoniously dumped out of office. For God’s sake, let’s make sure some future historian doesn’t have to try to figure out how the United States and Russia blundered into a war after the Soviet Union collapsed.

*Georgia after the recent revolution by “US educated” revolutionaries is largely a client kingdom of the US. Georgia is at war with South Ossetia (a client kingdom of Russia). Not so far fetched.

Doogie

North Korea has taken the same defence as Iran against the doctrine of pre-emption (i.e. target overseas nuclear facilities with ballistic missiles and rapidly try to develop nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them). Massive nuclear proliferation will be the result of the doctrine of pre-emption. Sudan, Syria and anyone else who feels threatened will be trying to do the same. So much for getting rid of WMD! Iraq was an object lesson for these countries as a relatively disarmed country is it was useless.

?Yes, I would like to see Israel take out Iran’s nuclear capabilities now before they are fully developed.?

Do you really think there will be no repercussions from this? Iran has stated that if attacked it will launch it ballistic missiles at Israel?s nuclear facilities. After that it may well just spiral out of control.

?Now is the time, while we have troops on both sides of them just in case they do get to feeling frisky.?

This is a very good point. But it also works in reverse. I don?t know where you live but there are an increasing number of Muslims were I live. Best not to be bombing their brethren if you want them to be nice to you?

[quote]bluey wrote:

Do you really think there will be no repercussions from this? Iran has stated that if attacked it will launch it ballistic missiles at Israel?s nuclear facilities. After that it may well just spiral out of control.

?Now is the time, while we have troops on both sides of them just in case they do get to feeling frisky.?

This is a very good point. But it also works in reverse. I don?t know where you live but there are an increasing number of Muslims were I live. Best not to be bombing their brethren if you want them to be nice to you?
[/quote]

I hope to God that whoever is making our policy decisions isn’t sitting around fretting about people being “nice” to us. If Iran gets the bomb, Iran will pass on the bomb. Nothing we can do is ever going to make these people “be nice” to us. I don’t want to sit around while they build nukes, hoping that they will collapse on themselves before they load one on a ship and dock it in one of our ports.

[quote]doogie wrote:
Nothing we can do is ever going to make these people “be nice” to us.[/quote]

I disagree.

If an American President were to stand up and say that the current division of the Middle East was wrong-headed, unfair, and stupid, it would perk up the ears of every Muslim on the planet.

If he were to further say that the establishment of Israel was similarly wrong-headed, unfair, and stupid, we would have their undivided attention.

And if he were to actually suggest that Israel needs to start playing nice with the Islamic community, especially under threat of sanctions, I think the Muslim world would drastically alter their opinions of the West almost overnight.

But that would involve caring about what’s right instead of what our allies want to hear. The Islamic community despises America primarily because we’re hypocrites. We claim to be about human rights and fairness, and yet we look the other way when Israel stomps all over these ideals. We only support these ideals when we find it to be convenient; the rest of the time, we just support our own interests.

And as a Jew, I’m specifically and uniquely qualified to criticise Israel’s behavior. They are far overdue for cheshbon hanafesh on this matter, and now is certainly the right time for it.

if this guy is truly a spy for israel then please give him the death penalty. we can’t give any indication that it’s ok for our “allies” to spy against us. if this was a blunder, please put him in prison for life. we can’t give any indication that it’s ok to mistakenly pass up classified information.

if it turns out that feith is actively involved in this, then please hang him by his nuts.

If one is to believe David Frum (I know bluey, he’s a neocon), this is much ado about nothing:

AUG. 30, 2004: JEWISH CONSPIRACIES IN THE PENTAGON?

NEW YORK - So all those left-wing kids taking media studies courses at college do seem actually to have learned something: The anti-Republican demonstraters who filed through Manhattan yesterday avoided disorder and violence to focus instead on creating powerful images for the evening news. Their message may be wrong-headed, but they did not step on it.

And the same can be said for whoever it was that leaked the story of the investigation of the alleged leak of a Pentagon planning document to a pro-Israel lobbying group. What a triumph of press manipulation this story is!

Somebody sold CBS News, NBC, and the Washington Post a grand conspiracy theory of sinister Zionist influence in the Pentagon based on ? well on what really? The theory alleges that

a) Two years ago, some Pentagon planners wrote a draft memo suggesting that the US adopt a tougher policy toward Iran;

b) One of those planners then supposedly informed a friend at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee about the memo ? who in turn informed the Israeli embassy.

Can we pause to consider what an amazing non-story all of this is?

The memo in question - a draft of a proposed presidential policy directive for Iran - was essentially rejected. The Bush administration has opted since 2001 for a policy of engagement and attempted compromise with Iran. For all practical purposes, the memo was an expression of something close to a purely personal opinion.

And even if the memo had been adopted, it involved no spycraft, no technical secrets. It simply offered a vision of what US policy toward Iran ought to be: a series of policy options.

Discussing policy options with knowledgeable people ? and even with allied governments ? is not ?espionage.?

Which is why, after 18 months of investigation, the investigators were about to drop the matter. It looks as if whoever leaked the story of the investigation leaked it precisely because he or she was annoyed that the investigators were concluding that the whole thing was much ado about nothing.

But by cleverly shopping it to journalists who were eager to strike a blow at the Bush administration, a fizzle of a story was (at least temporarily) transformed into a one-day wonder.

Who shopped it? Presumably somebody at the FBI ? an agency that has alas showed nothing like so much vigilance in cases in which life and limb were actually at risk. Along the way, however, the story got ?sexed up,? to borrow a phrase.

Here are some steamy extracts from CBS? report:

?CBS News has learned that the FBI has a full-fledged espionage investigation under way and is about to – in FBI terminology ? ?roll up? someone agents believe has been spying not for an enemy, but for Israel from within the office of the Secretary of Defense at the Pentagon. ?

?This put the Israelis, according to one source, ?inside the decision-making loop? so they could ?try to influence the outcome.?

?The case raises another concern among investigators: Did Israel also use the analyst to try to influence U.S. policy on the war in Iraq?

?With ties to top Pentagon officials Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, the analyst was assigned to a unit within the Defense Department tasked with helping develop the Pentagon’s Iraq policy.?

Notice a couple of things in the CBS report: The story is written in such a way as to suggest that it was the FBI investigators who described the Israelis as ?inside the loop.? And yet if you look carefully, you will see that this is not so. The allegation is attributed only to a ?source? who might or might not even be a government employee ? who is in fact very likely one of the small number of former government employees to whom journalists turn when they want some heavy breathing about the role of Israel.

Notice too the gratuitous and unsourced insinuation that Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith might somehow be implicated in the leak.

What seems to be going on here is this: People in the Pentagon broadly discussed proposed American policy toward one of America?s severest Middle Eastern problems ? Iran, its terrorism and its nuclear ambitions. In the course of those discussions, they talked to knowledgeable people in many places. Possibly they talked as well to knowledgeable people in the governments of US allies, including Israel.

But there are figures inside the US government who want to see Israel treated, not as the ally it is by law and treaty (Israel like Japan, Australia, and New Zealand is designated a ?major non-NATO ally? for intelligence- and technology-sharing purposes) but as the source of all the trouble in the Middle East and the world. They have injected their own hysterical agenda into the reporting of what would otherwise be a story of an FBI investigation that found nothing much.


Also:

Remember, this whole story turns on a supposedly super-secret draft presidential directive that Franklin disclosed to the Israelis. Perhaps you would like to know what was in the draft directive? Well, good news: You can. The thing was leaked to the Washington Post and a story based on the link was published on June 15, 2003.

Here are some extracts from the Post story:

?[T]he national security presidential directive on Iran has gone through several competing drafts and has yet to be approved by Bush’s senior advisers, according to well-placed sources. In the meantime, experts in and outside the government are focusing on Iran as the United States’ next big foreign policy crisis, with some predicting that the country could acquire a nuclear weapon as early as 2006.

?While the officials have stopped short of embracing a policy of ?regime change? in Iran, U.S. officials from Bush down have talked about providing moral support to the ?reform movement? in Iran in its struggle against an unelected government.

?Just how far the United States should go in supporting the protests is the subject of heated argument inside and outside the government, even among conservatives. Some argue Iran is ripe for revolution. Others contend there is little guarantee of radical change in Tehran in the three-year period some independent proliferation experts estimate it will take before Iran could acquire nuclear weapons, and the United States should be thinking about other options, including preemptive action against suspected nuclear sites.?

Etc.

The Post very obviously got its leak from State Department sources seeking to scuttle the draft directive. Back then, apparently, the permanent government did not regard the secrecy of this unimplemented document as anything like a vital national secret. Back then, the advocates of a soft-line policy were perfectly willing to air the directive in order to scupper it. Fourteen months later, however, you?d think the contents of this directive were the plans for the Stealth bomber. So, question: If this document was indeed so vital, when will the State Department seek to identify and punish the officials who revealed it to the Washington Post–which anyone, even the Israelis, can purchase a copy of for 35 cents.

Oh, the hypocrisy. If this were a Democrat accused of passing classified documents to a foriegn government, Republicans would be screaming blue murder.

And it’s not just one document, BB, this is a case that has been ongoing for 2 years.

The worst-ever security breech in our history was the Jonathon Pollard espionage case, in 1985. Pollard was caught passing intelligence to Israel. So it doesn’t take much imagination to believe that it could happen again. For info on Pollard:

Read the original article again: Both Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz were investigated in the past, for espionage and passing classified information to Israel. All three of these clowns (Wolfowitz, Perle and Franklin) are connected to Bush’s “Office of Special Plans”, an “alternative” intelligence office that was launched to specifically cultivate intelligence that would justify invading Iraq.

More:
"Journalist Steven Green, a long-time observer of Israeli espionage efforts in the United States, told the Daily Star that he had spoken extensively with individuals involved in the investigation, and that “I know from personal experience that its scope is much wider in terms of the targets than we have been told so far.”

He said that more senior officials than Franklin “should be extremely nervous about this.” Green speculated that the scandal might involve exchanges of information between “sophisticates in the intelligence communities of Israel and Iran at the expense of the United States. … There is a possible quid-pro-quo involved in Iran receiving US intelligence codes through the neocon favorite Ahmed Chalabi and the Israelis getting our latest thinking on Iran’s nuclear program. …You can see how that would benefit both parties, but not the US.”

USA Today reported Monday that law enforcement officials said “there may be some crossover” between the Franklin and Chalabi investigations."

"Jason Vest, a journalist who has written extensively on US military and intelligence issues, told the Daily Star: “I would describe the reaction to this scandal in the intelligence community as one of anger and of contempt, but not of surprise. No one believes, at all, that Israel does not spy on the United States, and no has believed that since Pollard. … Of course.”

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=7909

But since we’re talking about Republicans, it’s funny to watch the hard-line partisans bending over backwards to pretend like spying and passing state secrets is really no big deal.

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
Oh, the hypocrisy. If this were a Democrat accused of passing classified documents to a foriegn government, Republicans would be screaming blue murder.

And it’s not just one document, BB, this is a case that has been ongoing for 2 years.

The worst-ever security breech in our history was the Jonathon Pollard espionage case, in 1985. Pollard was caught passing intelligence to Israel. So it doesn’t take much imagination to believe that it could happen again. For info on Pollard:

Read the original article again: Both Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz were investigated in the past, for espionage and passing classified information to Israel. All three of these clowns (Wolfowitz, Perle and Franklin) are connected to Bush’s “Office of Special Plans”, an “alternative” intelligence office that was launched to specifically cultivate intelligence that would justify invading Iraq.

More:
"Journalist Steven Green, a long-time observer of Israeli espionage efforts in the United States, told the Daily Star that he had spoken extensively with individuals involved in the investigation, and that “I know from personal experience that its scope is much wider in terms of the targets than we have been told so far.”

He said that more senior officials than Franklin “should be extremely nervous about this.” Green speculated that the scandal might involve exchanges of information between “sophisticates in the intelligence communities of Israel and Iran at the expense of the United States. … There is a possible quid-pro-quo involved in Iran receiving US intelligence codes through the neocon favorite Ahmed Chalabi and the Israelis getting our latest thinking on Iran’s nuclear program. …You can see how that would benefit both parties, but not the US.”

USA Today reported Monday that law enforcement officials said “there may be some crossover” between the Franklin and Chalabi investigations."

"Jason Vest, a journalist who has written extensively on US military and intelligence issues, told the Daily Star: “I would describe the reaction to this scandal in the intelligence community as one of anger and of contempt, but not of surprise. No one believes, at all, that Israel does not spy on the United States, and no has believed that since Pollard. … Of course.”

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=7909

But since we’re talking about Republicans, it’s funny to watch the hard-line partisans bending over backwards to pretend like spying and passing state secrets is really no big deal.

[/quote]

I guess it depends on the documents in question Lumpy – if they were actually top-secret documents, I definitely have a problem. If they weren’t, then I don’t. We’ll see what comes out.

BTW, it may just be me, but I would consider the worst breach of our intelligence that was highly publicized to be the Rosenberg’s giving atomic-weapon information to the Soviets back in the 1950s - but again, that’s just me. Unfortunately, there are probably worse breaches that we know nothing about.

Didn’t the republicans want to string a certain Sandy Berger up by the nuts recently? Wasn’t he stuffing documents in his pants and socks? Wasn’t he putting the US in great danger via use of a cell phone?

I said at the time, if he’s guilty convict him, and then go after the idiots who let him get away with doing those things. I’m not sure where this one has gone, if anywhere.

Anyhow, shouldn’t the same outrage and concern be in place for this incident? Is there really an investigation? Did anything really happen? What should the penalty be for this? Who else is involved? Is it another in a series of missteps by the administration?

Maybe the administration shouldn’t be going to war with the CIA and the FBI and the State Department and going their own way on things all the time? Maybe we don’t have a very effective team builder or leader after all?

I don’t know. However, those of you seeking blood recently should be out for the jugular over this as well, or just resign yourself to being a complete and utter hypocrit.

[quote]doogie wrote:
bluey wrote:

Do you really think there will be no repercussions from this? Iran has stated that if attacked it will launch it ballistic missiles at Israel?s nuclear facilities. After that it may well just spiral out of control.

?Now is the time, while we have troops on both sides of them just in case they do get to feeling frisky.?

This is a very good point. But it also works in reverse. I don?t know where you live but there are an increasing number of Muslims were I live. Best not to be bombing their brethren if you want them to be nice to you?

I hope to God that whoever is making our policy decisions isn’t sitting around fretting about people being “nice” to us. If Iran gets the bomb, Iran will pass on the bomb. Nothing we can do is ever going to make these people “be nice” to us. I don’t want to sit around while they build nukes, hoping that they will collapse on themselves before they load one on a ship and dock it in one of our ports.
[/quote]

Maybe you should think about what happens when a multi-cultural society stops being nice to each other. Think Yugoslavia as an example.

But maybe you are right these people are never going to be nice to us. But invading one country after another, sending wave after wave of angry, inbittered refugess to our homes does not make much sence them. Of couse in a world of black and white such grey matters (i.e. consequences) don’t matter. Hmm was not 9/11 carried out by 1st and 2nd generation Arab immigrants to Europe. Was not the Madrid bombings carried out by North African immigrants to Europe. No ROUGE STATES were involved. So using terrorism as a pretext to invade ‘rouge states’ well?

Your argument about Iran and nuclear weapons is illogical. Even if you invade Iran who next, Pakistan? then who? It is not possiable.

Anyway WMD is just a pretext than can be used not the real driving force in the “war on terror”. Iran and Syria like Iraq have little to do with international terrorism. They have NOTHING to do with Al-Queda. This is a fact. They are however all enemies of Israel. Hmmm what’s this all about again?

Anyway I don’t really care anymore. As there is nothing I can do about it either way.

Wall Street Journal Editorial
A Spy for Israel?
September 1, 2004; Page A12

Either espionage isn’t what it used to be, or someone is spinning secrets the way they shouldn’t. At least that’s how it looks nearly a week after word leaked about a purported spy for Israel at the Pentagon.

It’s hard to see behind the veil of classification, but on current evidence this is not another Jonathan Pollard, the bona fide spy still in jail for spilling U.S. secrets to Israel in the 1980s. Nor is it part of a Zionist conspiracy run by Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith, whose photograph seems to accompany every news report.

As of this writing, no charges have been brought against Lawrence Franklin, a mid-level Pentagon analyst suspected of passing to Israel classified documents on Iran via Aipac, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Israel denies it, Aipac denies it, and Mr. Franklin is said to be cooperating with the FBI.

Our sources tell us that Mr. Franklin may have disclosed something he shouldn’t have to the press some time ago. This gave the FBI the opening to force his cooperation and search his home, where they found some documents that did not belong there. If this is so, Mr. Franklin wouldn’t be the first government official to break the law by taking classified material home. Former CIA director John Deutch transferred thousands of pages of secret documents to his home computer, for which he was pardoned by Bill Clinton in his last hours in office.

The latest leaks say Mr. Franklin may be charged with mishandling classified documents, or not even charged at all. In either case, it’s a far cry from CBS News’s original report last Friday that “the FBI has a full-fledged espionage investigation under way and is about to – in FBI terminology – ‘roll up’ someone agents believe has been spying not for an enemy, but for Israel from within the office of the Secretary of Defense at the Pentagon.”

In its initial report, CBS went on to say: “With ties to top Pentagon officials [Deputy Secretary] Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, the analyst was assigned to a unit within the Defense Department tasked with helping develop the Pentagon’s Iraq policy.” You don’t need a secret decoder ring to know that this sentence is meant as a bit of innuendo against the Pentagon’s “neoconservatives,” who in this case happen to be Jewish (though Mr. Franklin is not).

As it happens, the FBI has had Mr. Franklin under surveillance for more than a year and has turned up nothing on anyone else at the Pentagon. His superiors only learned about the investigation this past weekend. In any event, there are six layers of Pentagon bureaucracy between Mr. Franklin, a desk officer on Iran, and Mr. Feith, who supervises a staff of 1,500. Mr. Wolfowitz is even farther removed.

The information Mr. Franklin is suspected of leaking has to do with the debate on Iran within the Bush Administration, specifically with the draft of a Presidential policy directive. It’s hard to believe that the Israelis would need secret sources to illuminate this issue, given the close ties between the two countries. The Iran question has also been widely aired in the press, including in an op-ed that Mr. Franklin wrote for The Wall Street Journal Europe in 2000.

Finally, let us say a word about Mr. Franklin personally. He is a career Defense intelligence analyst – a former Soviet analyst who reinvented himself after the Cold War as a Farsi-speaking Mideast expert and moved to the Defense Department early in the Bush Administration. He is also a colonel in the Air Force Reserve. Those who have worked with him say he is a patriot. If the feds believe he committed a crime, he deserves to be charged in a court of law and given a chance to defend himself.

Why is it OK for the US, Britain, France, India, Israel, Germany etc to have WMD, and why is it OK for them to continue to produce WMD? I’m not advocating Iran building the bomb, simply pointing out the hypocracy. Iran wants WMD not to kill weseterners, or Israelis or take over the world or whatever, it wants them in the face of US military posturing. They have seen what happened to Iraq, they have watched the plight of Palestinians for 30 years- they have seen the state sponsored terrorism the US has engaged in and now their backs against the wall.