[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
JusttheFacts wrote:
Or how about the Israeli spy investigation involving the Pentagon and AIPAC:
FBI steps up AIPAC probe
"In 2001, the FBI discovered new, [u]“massive” Israeli spying operations in the East Coast, including New York and New Jersey, said one former senior U.S. government official.[/u]
(To be fair I have seen it mentioned on CNN’s scrolling banner once or twice.)
This is the big one though- the 4 part FOX NEWS story that got yanked as soon as it came out in Dec 2001 - (after this it seems FOX took an immediate right)
Transcript part 1 -
Transcript part 2 -
Video part 3 - 3MB
http://www.photographyandartbycarl.com/911/FOXpt3.rm
Video part 4 - 7MB
http://www.photographyandartbycarl.com/911/FOXpt4.wmv
Unfortunately anything with real teeth just somehow gets buried…I remember the good ole’ days when spying on the US was frowned upon.
BostonBarrister wrote:
I heard about this – what sort of teeth does this have? We know our allies spy on us, and I believe we spy on them too. Unless the story alleges stealing of defense secrets or something important, I wouldn’t call this newsworthy. Do we see stories about French agents or British agents or satellites or what have you?[/quote]
Yes our allies spy on us…but how many of our allies are involved in a major spy investigation involving the highest offices in the Pentagon, namely the Office of Special Plans. I’m sure I don’t need to remind you of the Neo Con/Israel connection. But worst of all, since you brought up defense secrets…Israel is the second largest arms supplier to China behind Russia. Guess who China sells weapons to?..Iran, Iraq and Syria. How funny is that? Actually not very.
China’s Missile Imports and Assistance From Israel
China’s missile-related imports and assistance from Israel have been a subject of particular concern in the United States because of worries that Israel may be providing China with “back door” access to controlled, sensitive US technology. For example, in the early 1990s, reports surfaced that Israel had secretly transferred information on the US Patriot missile system to China, in violation of Israel’s promise to the United States not to transfer the Patriot technology to any third country. Although both China and Israel denied the allegations, US government sources concluded that it was almost certain that a transfer of technology (though not physical equipment) had taken place.
China is reportedly using the Patriot technology to improve its surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems and to develop countermeasures against the Patriot for its ballistic and cruise missiles; reports also indicated that China intended to sell these SAMs and enhanced missiles to other countries, possibly including Iran. Reports suggested various Israeli motives for the transfer: some suggested that Israel had traded Patriot information for information on China’s missiles; others asserted that Israel’s transfer of Patriot technology was intended to encourage China to curtail its sales of ballistic missiles to countries in the Middle East such as Syria and Iran.
In addition to the alleged Patriot technology transfer, Israel has allegedly supplied China with cruise missile technology, including sensitive US technology. Specifically, Israel is allegedly assisting China with the development of its YF-12A, YJ-62, and YJ-92 cruise missiles.
In September 1992, responding to US accusations that Israel sold China Patriot missile secrets, Chinese Foreign Minister Qian Qichen denied “that there had been any kind of military cooperation between Israel and China prior to the establishment of diplomatic relations.”
Under U.S. pressure, Israel backed out of a deal with China, potentially valued at 1 billion, in July of 2000. Under the deal, Israel would have outfitted three Chinese Il-76 planes with Phalcon radars. The United States believed the deal would tip the strategic balance against Taiwan. Chinese authorities responded harshly and demanded return of their deposit and compensation. In the Spring of 2002, Israel agreed to pay a reported $300 million to put an end to the dispute over the cancellation.
Since the cancellation of the Phalcon radar deal, Israel has assisted China in other areas including the development of the HQ-9/FT-2000, a surface-to-air missile, which would possibly use U.S. seeker technology. It has also assisted China in the area of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). In July 2002, China deployed Israeli “Harpy” anti-radar drones in military exercises in Fujian Province.
On 2 January 2003, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher stated that Israeli military exports to China were of concern to the United States. The following day, Israel announced that it would comply with U.S. demands and halt all contracts on the export of arms and security equipment to China. A spokesperson for the Israeli Defense Ministry announced on 8 January that, “Defense relations between Israel and China require from time to time consideration of specific issues. The revision [sic] concluded vis-a-vis China and on concrete issues also vis-a-vis the U.S., bearing in mind American sensitivity.” An Israeli official, electing to remain anonymous, suggested that Israel would continue to sell to China military equipment available on the global arms market. According to the Associate Press, China issued a written statement in response to the Israeli announcement. In the statement, it states that, “It is China’s consistent position that the development of normal military trade cooperation with Israel is a matter between the two countries.”
http://www.nti.org/db/china/imisr.htm
FRIEND TO FRIEND TO FOE
How U.S. Arms Transfers to Israel Come Back to Haunt Both Allies
By Jonathan Reingold
As Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s “Operation Defensive Wall” continues and Secretary of State Colin Powell seeks to cool tensions in the region, Americans need to know how involved they already are in the Middle East.
From 1990 to 2000 U.S. military aid to Israel totaled over $18 billion. No other nation in the world has such a close relationship with the U.S. military and arms industry. Recently, questions have been raised about the extent to which U.S. military aid is abetting human rights abuses by Israeli forces operating on the West Bank. These debates will no doubt continue for some time. In the mean time, however, there is another aspect of the American-Israeli relationship that may have an even greater impact on U.S. and Israeli security in the long run: the ongoing transfer of American arms technology from Israel to potential U.S. (and Israeli) adversaries around the globe.
From the most sophisticated warplanes to tank engines, artillery systems and armored vehicles, the United States is Israel’s one-stop shopping center. Last year alone the U.S. sold one hundred top-of-the-line F-16s to Israel for a total of over $3 billion. That same year Israel purchased 9 of the newest Apache helicopter version equipped with the Longbow Radar system. The helicopter-buying spree didn’t end with the Apaches. Israel bought fifteen Cobra attack helicopters last year along with twenty-four Black Hawk transport helicopters.
Besides selling aircraft, the United States is also Israel’s preferred vendor for missiles. Although Israel has designed its own version of the U.S. air-to-air AIM9 sidewinder missile, the Python 3, it still relies on the U.S. for its ground attack technology. Two years ago Lockheed Martin sold Israel approximately 80 AGM-142D Popeye air-to-surface missiles. Israel also buys the AGM65 Maverick air-to-surface missile produced by Hughes and Raytheon.
In addition, the U.S. sells Israel the engines for its “indigenous” Merkava main battle tank. In 1999 Israel purchased 400 power packs for their Merkava fleet. The Merkava was developed by Israel so that it wouldn’t have to rely on “fickle” countries like Britain, France or Russia when it was in the midst of a conflict.
Transactions between the U.S. and Israel are not necessarily worrisome by themselves; after all, as Israel has proved, there are a host of countries willing to sell the weapons it needs. Currently, Germany is Israel’s source for submarines, and if Israel really needed fighters, Russia is always looking to make a buck and always seems to have a surfeit of aircraft and other excess defense articles.
The real danger comes in Israel’s habit of reverse engineering U.S. technology and selling to nations hostile to U.S. interests. Israel’s client list includes Cambodia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, the South Lebanon Army, India, China, Burma and Zambia. The U.S. has most recently warmed up to India and is now in fact competing with Israel for arms sales there, but the other Israeli customers remain dubious at best.
Perhaps the most troubling of all is the Israeli/Chinese arms relationship. Israel is China’s second largest supplier of arms. Coincidentally, the newest addition to the Chinese air force, the F-10 multi-role fighter, is an almost identical version of the Lavi (Lion). The Lavi was a joint Israeli-American design based upon the F-16 for manufacture in Israel, but financed mostly with American aid. Plagued by cost overruns, it was canceled in 1987, but not before the U.S. spent $1.5 billion on the project.
Last April, when the Navy EP-3E surveillance plane was forced to land in China after a Chinese F-8 fighter flew into its propeller, photos show Israeli built Python 3 missiles under the fighter’s wings.
If Israeli weapons sales to China induce misgivings, including the most recent U.S. blocked sale of Israel’s Phalcon airborne radar, the beneficiaries of Chinese arms transfers of Israeli-American technology are even more disturbing. In 1996, as disclosed in the UN Register of Conventional Arms, China sold over 100 missiles and launchers to Iran, along with a handful of combat aircraft and warships. Even worse, in 1997 the New York Daily News reported that Iraq had deployed Israeli-developed, Chinese PL-8 missiles in the no-fly zones, endangering American pilots.
Americans deserve to know where their money is being spent, and how money allocated for friends and technology shared with friends can all too easily end up in the wrong hands, threatening all parties involved. At a minimum, discussions on a new security framework for the Middle East should include plans to monitor and restrict Israeli transfers of U.S.-origin military equipment to potential adversaries. Otherwise, this deadly technology could come back to haunt U.S. and Israeli forces in future conflicts.
http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/updates/041802.html#II