Israel+America=Trouble?

“I sit here and post this, while the right are already spining the damage control.

How bad must it get, for the rest of you to *get it*?


FBI looks at Pentagon worker in Israel spy probe
Report: Suspect has ties to Wolfowitz, Feith
Friday, August 27, 2004 Posted: 11:10 PM EDT (0310 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The FBI has evidence that a person who has been working at high levels in the Pentagon may be a spy for Israel, senior U.S. officials confirmed to CNN on Friday.

The suspect could have been in a position to influence Bush administration policy toward Iran and Iraq, the senior official said.

However, another government official said the suspect is "not in a level to influence policy."

"He is an analyst in an undersecretary's office," this official said.

A senior Pentagon official confirmed to CNN that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld "had been made generally aware that the Justice Department had an investigation going on."

CBS News, which first reported the story, said the FBI had developed evidence against the suspect, including photographs and conversations recorded through wiretaps.

The network said the suspect has ties to two senior Pentagon officials: Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith.

Multiple sources have told CNN that the investigation is well along, and one government official described the evidence against the suspect as a "slam dunk case" and said "there has been no decision to prosecute the individual."

Officials said the suspect passed classified documents to Israel through the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a pro-Israel lobbying group.

But AIPAC released a statement late Friday calling the news reports "false and baseless."

The statement said AIPAC learned Friday that "the government is investigating an employee of the Department of Defense for possible violations in handling confidential information."

A designation of the material as confidential would indicate a much lower level of secrecy than if it had been designated as classified.

AIPAC said it "is cooperating fully" with government authorities, including providing documents and information and making staff members available for interviews. Sources told CNN that two AIPAC employees have been interviewed in the case by the FBI.

"Neither AIPAC nor any of its employees has violated any laws or rules, nor has AIPAC or its employees ever received information they believed was secret or classified," the statement said. "AIPAC is an American organization comprised of proud and loyal U.S. citizens committed to promoting American interests. We do not condone or tolerate any violation of any U.S. law or interests."

Washington insiders note that it is not unusual for friendly governments to have access to certain classified information, so even if the allegations are correct, not everyone involved may have thought they were involved in espionage. Still, one U.S. source is calling the case "a very serious matter."

David Siegel, a spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, denied the allegations.

"The United States is Israel's most cherished friend and ally. We have a strong, ongoing, working relationship at all levels, and in no way would Israel do anything to impair this relationship."

An Israeli official in Washington said the U.S. government has not contacted the Israelis about any such investigation.

Despite the close relationship between the two countries, espionage against the United States on behalf of Israel would not be without precedent. Former U.S. Navy intelligence analyst Jonathan Pollard is serving a life sentence for passing classified material to Israel.

The Justice Department, speaking for the FBI, refused to comment, saying only, "We cannot confirm or deny the report."

An FBI spokesman said the bureau has no comment on the CBS report.”

“It doesn't matter, laqtis. Bush is a moron, America loves the moron. Bush will be re-elected and America deserves to go down the drain.”

“The news out right at the moment sez that Israel has something to do with the faulty intel given to the US re: the whole *Iraq trying to get nuke materials from Africa* thing.

This stinks. I don't see any bias here. All reporting agencies are reprting the same thing.

We have a major problem on our hands here.


Serious *geopolitical* problems.....”

“Iran-Contra II?

Fresh scrutiny on a rogue Pentagon operation.

By Joshua Micah Marshall, Laura Rozen, and Paul Glastris Washington Monthly

On Friday evening, CBS News reported that the FBI is investigating a suspected mole in the Department of Defense who allegedly passed to Israel, via a pro-Israeli lobbying organization, classified American intelligence about Iran. The focus of the investigation, according to U.S. government officials, is Larry Franklin, a veteran Defense Intelligence Agency Iran analyst now working in the office of the Pentagon's number three civilian official, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith.

The investigation of Franklin is now shining a bright light on a shadowy struggle within the Bush administration over the direction of U.S. policy toward Iran. In particular, the FBI is looking with renewed interest at an unauthorized back-channel between Iranian dissidents and advisers in Feith's office, which more-senior administration officials first tried in vain to shut down and then later attempted to cover up.

Franklin, along with another colleague from Feith's office, a polyglot Middle East expert named Harold Rhode, were the two officials involved in the back-channel, which involved on-going meetings and contacts with Iranian arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar and other Iranian exiles, dissidents and government officials. Ghorbanifar is a storied figure who played a key role in embroiling the Reagan administration in the Iran-Contra affair. The meetings were both a conduit for intelligence about Iran and Iraq and part of a bitter administration power-struggle pitting officials at DoD who have been pushing for a hard-line policy of "regime change" in Iran, against other officials at the State Department and the CIA who have been counseling a more cautious approach.

Reports of two of these meetings first surfaced a year ago in Newsday, and have since been the subject of an ongoing investigation by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Whether or how the meetings are connected to the alleged espionage remains unknown. But the FBI is now closely scrutinizing them.

While the FBI is looking at the meetings as part of its criminal investigation, to congressional investigators the Ghorbanifar back-channel typifies the out-of-control bureaucratic turf wars which have characterized and often hobbled Bush administration policy-making. And an investigation by The Washington Monthly -- including a rare interview with Ghorbanifar -- adds weight to those concerns. The meetings turn out to have been far more extensive and much less under White House control than originally reported. One of the meetings, which Pentagon officials have long characterized as merely a "chance encounter" seems in fact to have been planned long in advance by Rhode and Ghorbanifar. Another has never been reported in the American press. The administration's reluctance to disclose these details seems clear: the DoD-Ghorbanifar meetings suggest the possibility that a rogue faction at the Pentagon was trying to work outside normal US foreign policy channels to advance a "regime change" agenda not approved by the president's foreign policy principals or even the president himself.

The Italian Job

The first meeting occurred in Rome in December, 2001. It included Franklin, Rhode, and another American, the neoconservative writer and operative Michael Ledeen, who organized the meeting. (According to UPI, Ledeen was then working for Feith as a consultant.) Also in attendance was Ghorbanifar and a number of other Iranians. One of the Iranians, according to two sources familiar with the meeting, was a former senior member of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard who claimed to have information about dissident ranks within the Iranian security services. The Washington Monthly has also learned from U.S. government sources that Nicolo Pollari, the head of Italy's military intelligence agency, SISMI, attended the meetings, as did the Italian Minister of Defense Antonio Martino, who is well-known in neoconservative circles in Washington.

Alarm bells about the December 2001 meeting began going off in U.S. government channels only days after it occurred. On December 12th 2001, at the U.S. Embassy in Rome, America's newly-installed Ambassador, Mel Sembler, sat down for a private dinner with Ledeen, an old friend of his from Republican Party politics, and Martino, the Italian defense minister. The conversation quickly turned to the meeting. The problem was that this was the first that Ambassador Sembler had heard about it.

According to U.S. government sources, Sembler immediately set about trying to determine what he could about the meeting and how it had happened. Since U.S. government contact with foreign government intelligence agencies is supposed to be overseen by the CIA, Sembler first spoke to the CIA station chief in Rome to find out what if anything he knew about the meeting with the Iranians. But that only raised more questions because the station chief had been left in the dark as well. Soon both Sembler and the Rome station chief were sending anxious queries back to the State Department and CIA Headquarters in Langley, Virginia, respectively, raising alarms on both sides of the Potomac.

The meeting was a source of concern for a series of overlapping reasons. Since the late 1980s Ghorbanifar has been the subject of two CIA "burn notices." The Agency believes Ghorbanifar is a serial "fabricator" and forbids its officers from having anything to do with him. Moreover, why were mid-level Pentagon officials organizing meetings with a foreign intelligence agency behind the back of the CIA -- a clear breach of US government protocol? There was also a matter of personal chagrin for Sembler: At State Department direction, he had just been cautioning the Italians to restrain their contacts with bad-acting states like Iran (with which Italy has extensive trade ties).

According to U.S. government sources, both the State Department and the CIA eventually brought the matter to the attention of the White House -- specifically, to Condoleezza Rice's chief deputy on the National Security Council, Stephen J. Hadley. Later, Italian spy chief Pollari raised the matter privately with Tenet, who himself went to Hadley in early February 2002. Goaded by Tenet, Hadley sent word to the officials in Feith's office and to Ledeen to cease all such activities. Hadley then contacted Sembler, assuring him it wouldn't happen again and to report back if it did.

The orders, however, seem to have had little effect, for a second meeting was soon underway. According to a story published this summer in Corriere della Sera, a leading Italian daily, this second meeting took place in Rome in June, 2002. Ghorbanifar tells The Washington Monthly that he arranged that meeting after a flurry of faxes between himself and DoD official Harold Rhode. Though he did not attend it himself, Ghorbanifar says the meeting consisted of an Egyptian, an Iraqi, and a high-level U.S. government official, whose name he declined to reveal. The first two briefed the American official about the general situation in Iraq and the Middle East, and what would happen in Iraq, "and it's happened word for word since," says Ghorbanifar. A spokesman for the NSC declined to comment on this and other meetings and referred The Washington Monthly to the Defense Department, which did not respond to repeated inquiries. Ledeen also refused to comment.

No one at the U.S. Embassy in Rome seems to have known about this second Rome meeting. But the back-channel's continuing existence became apparent the following month -- July 2002 -- when Ledeen again contacted Sembler and told him that he'd be back in Rome in September to continue "his work" with the Iranians (This time Ledeen made no mention of any involvement by Pentagon officials; later he told Sembler it would be in August rather than September.) An exasperated Sembler again sent word back to Washington and Hadley again went into motion telling Ledeen, in no uncertain terms, to back off.

Once again, however, Hadley's orders seem to have gone unheeded. Almost a year later, in June, 2003, there were still further meetings in Paris involving Rhode and Ghorbanifar. Ghorbanifar says the purpose of the meeting was for Rhode to get more information on the situation in Iraq and the Middle East. "In those meetings we met, we gave him the scenario, what would happen in the coming days in Iraq. And everything has happened word for word as we told him," Ghorbanifar repeats. "We met in several different places in Paris," he says, "Rhode met several other people -- he didn't only meet me."

Not a "chance encounter"

By the summer of 2003, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence had begun to get wind of the Ghorbanifar-Ledeen-DoD back-channel and made inquiries at the CIA. A month later, Newsday broke the original story about the secret Ghorbanifar channel. Faced with the disclosure, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld acknowledged the December, 2001 meeting but dismissed it as routine and unimportant.

"The information has moved around the interagency process to all the departments and agencies," he told reporters in Crawford, TX after a meeting with Bush. "As I understand it, there wasn't anything there that was of substance or of value that needed to be pursued further." Later that day, another senior Defense official acknowledged the second meeting, in Paris, June, 2003, but insisted that it was the result of a "chance encounter" between Ghorbanifar and a Pentagon official. The administration has kept to the "chance encounter" story to this day.

Ghorbanifar, however, laughs off that idea. "Run into each other? We had a prior arrangement," he told The Washington Monthly: "It involved a lot of discussion, and a lot of people."

Over the last year, the Senate Intelligence Committee has conducted limited inquiry into the meetings, including interviews with Feith and Ledeen. But under terms of a compromise agreed to by both parties, a full investigation into the matter was put off until after the November election. Republicans on the committee, many of whom sympathize with the "regime change" agenda at DoD, have been resistant to such investigations, calling them an election-year fishing expedition. Democrats, by contrast, see such investigations as vital to understanding the central role Feith's office may have played in a range of a dubious intelligence enterprises, from pushing claims about a supposed Saddam-al Qaeda partnership and overblown estimates of alleged Iraqi stocks of WMD to what the committee's ranking minority member Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D-WV) calls "the Chalabi factor" (Rhode and others in Feith's office have been major sponsors of the Iraqi exile leader, who is now under investigation for passing U.S. intelligence to Iran). With the FBI adding potential espionage charges to the mix the long-simmering questions about the activities of Feith's operation now seem certain to come under renewed scrutiny.”

“At this point, its hard to tell how serious this is. It could be fairly trivial, it could be a Jonathan Pollard scale thing or it could be worse. I'll just watch the info as it comes in.”

“The NY Times has a pretty good article on this.”

“I think that the trouble we've gone to protect Israel is greatly out of proportion to Israel's strategic value to the United States.

And, currently, Israel is a state that does not allow almost half of the population in its territory the right to vote. In several years that non-voting population will be the majority.

So, the idea that we should support Israel for democratic reasons is bogus. And Israel is such a regional pariah that they have limited strategic value.

In a world of limited oil supply, we no longer have the luxury of supporting a country whose protection makes that oil supply more tenuous.”

“Actually, Israel does allow everyone in Israel to vote. There is a lot that Israel does that I oppose, but we need to keep track of facts.

There are at least 4 things that keep US support and subsidies high: 1) Israel's cooperation with a very hawkish faction of the US government, 2) strong support for Israel from right wing evangelicals (many of whom see a mideast conflagration as a fulfillment of Biblical prophecy), 3) strong support from much of the Jewish community, 4) strong support from people who have admired Israel or feel guilt over US actions during the holocaust (like turning away boat loads of Jewish refugees).

I wish the US would have long ago said that for every dollar Israel spends on West Bank settlements, the US would deduct five dollars in aid to Israel.”

“I agree with both of you, but I must say that I thought that I saw on a recent Doc that Israel does not allow the Palis to vote for national government postions. The story surrounded that fact that they didn't allow this to happen, because in the very near future, Palis will out number and have the majority in just a couple of years and could gain power in the Israeli government, something that I'm sure would send concern around the area.

Now, I could be wrong, or the story might be in error, as well. It was on the Discovery/Times Station on ComcastCable about 4 months ago. This piece also addressed the question: Why do they hate us so. Very interesting watching, to say the least, as Israel is a major player in the terrorism against us.

Also, I heard on NPR on Friday, how some of this all started way back when....when the CIA took out the legit, elected leader of Iran and installed our own *person*, the Shaw, all because that leader wouldn't play ball with us in regards to oil. Up until then, we had pretty good relations with the Middle East, but that point started the whole *death to America* thing.

Funny who the more things change, the more they stay the same....”

“I think we should support Israel, up to a point.

I’d like to think that America is still a place that protects human rights around the world, even if it is inconvenient or dangerous to us. The holocaust proved the need for a Jewish homeland and we were right to support Israel’s establishment and continued right to exist.

The treatment of the Palestinians under occupation is nothing short of barbaric and Bush’s recent support for expansion of some settlements is immoral and contrary to international law. I’d fully support a tying of aid to settlement activity like ped suggested above.”

“I agree with Ped's suggestion as well. When we have a double standard like this, it give more excuses for more terrorism. Israel had been a thorn in the side of the world for far too long and it needs to be delt with, one way or another.”

“That would be the Shah of Iran.

He was a prince in exile in '54 when the U.S. and Britain helped install him.

The poor bastard had to give up his playboy lifestyle for that of a puppet.

It seems that Anglo Persian Petrol was pissed about the oil fields being nationalized as per democratic process.”

“That would be it, MarkO. Thanks for the pick up on the info and the spelling.”

“laqtis - non-Jews in the west Bank aren't Isaraeli citizens, and therefore don't vote in Israeli elections.

Non-Jews in the land Israel claims as part of Israel proper are citizens, and have the right to vote. Areas Israel occupied since 1967 and annexed (like Gaza and parts of Jerusalem) are claimed by Israel and all residents get citizenship.

This is from a pro-Israel web site, but the basic fact is right:

http://www.bicom.org.uk/faqs_treatment.html”

“The treatment of the Palestinians under occupation is nothing short of barbaric...I’d fully support a tying of aid to settlement activity like ped suggested above.

I'll never understand the mindset of terrorist sympathisers. Palis blow up a bus full of Israeli women and children? No thread, no discussion, no condemnation. But those damn Israelis building houses?!?!? Oh how terrible! How awful! Shame on those Nazis!

The Palis are in the situation they are in because they themselves put themselves there. They don't want a state - they turned that down. They only want to kill the Jews. If that wasn't pretty much their sole reason to exist, they *should* have much more of a beef with Jordan, but of course they don't.

You guys are un-American a$$holes.”

“RL, I hardly think cutting Israel loose is a good idea. Basiclly we are the only thing holding the dogs back that would destroy Israel at the drop of a hat. And of course without us holding Israel back they would most certainly go back to their "the best defense is a strong offense" way of handling their arab neigbors. I don't think abandoning the only democracey of the region would be a good showing either.

Israel's problems go much deeper and are far more intricate than “they won’t let half their people vote”. Israel stands to be forced out of their own country through mass assimilation from Arab countries. As Arafart himself has sated to his people (and lets not forget he’s an Egyptian and not even a “Palestinian”) that the greatest weapon they have against the Jews are the wombs of their women.”

“"You guys are un-American a$$holes."
Mutt
09:07:42 AM

My a$$hole is 100% American.”

“New Millenium. Time to take back the Holy Land...Again!

Jihad Isreal!”

“Hey Mutt - I believe there were jewish terrorists in palestine before there were Arab terrorists, no?”

“Yep, there were. Past tense. History before the Palestine Mandate really isn't that relevant to the current situation, as back then, the area's political forces were heavily influenced by the Ottoman empire, and later England and France et al.

But, Jewish atrocities were almost always in response to Arab atrocities. Doesn't make it right, but still, the pattern remains today.”

“But, Jewish atrocities were almost always in response to Arab atrocities. Doesn't make it right, but still, the pattern remains today."
Mutt
10:20:53 AM
08/30/04

Not so sure about that. Didn't Jewish terrorism increase greatly after WWII? I believe Yassir Arafat's parents were victims of such acts.”

“Speaking in generalities here.”

“I understand. There's a lot of hate in the middle east. Most of it due to outside influences.

And we try to "fix it" with more intervention. It's like hitting yourself in the head with a hammer, saying "ow", and doing it again. We seem to be brain damaged.”

“What do you prepose BearMag? Letting them destroy each other and sit by and watch? Just because something seems impossible doesn't mean we should strive for it.”

“Thanks for bringing your particular brand of stupidity and hostility to this thread mutt.”

“Mutt seems to be the only one here making any sense. keep it up Mutt!”

“Good question, Nigal. What have we done right in the Middle East?

It seems each time we intervene it ends up costing more in lives and stability.

Maybe everyone should pull out and let them sort things out? I mean, as long as Isreal pulls out to.”

“Violin, your side is the one promoting stupidity and hate by equating Pali terrorism with revolutionary warfare.”

“Some say my dad should have pulled out too. LOL!

Why would you speak out so loudly when people are being slaughtered in the Sudan while the world watches yet you suggest we pull out and allow the exact same thing to happen in the mid-east? And you know that’s exactly what would happen to Israel too. And do you believe that when they get done there they would just stop and live peaceably within the mid-east? Now I’m not trying to be comparative to the domino effects of communism but we have to ask the question.”

“A slaughter would be prevented if the Israelis left, no?

I wonder how many have died since Israel was created?”

“"Good question, Nigal. What have we done right in the Middle East?"



Sorry, didn’t mean to skirt the question there. Well, we have supported democracy there through Israel. Our very support by buying their oil. Besides oil is there anything the Arab dictatorships offer the world? Ever looked at the back of a computer and seen Made in Jordan printed on it?

Which brings up the other side of the coin, what has the middle east done right by the rest of the world?”

“We could always tell both of them to shut the f up and deal with the problem, or else.

I fear, however, that as long as Israel is a state, therewill be nothing but bloodshed.

There was much more peace, it seems as through our recent flip-flop of policy toward the settlements is a *go ahead* to the Jews. The surrounding countries hae already gotten ther ass kicked, I doubt even IF Israel bombed the nuke plant in Iran (like it did against Iraq and has thought about doing it against Iran), the Arabs still just might sit back......that is unless Iran lobbs a nuke at Iran, then we'd have a whole chit load of trouble.”

“"A slaughter would be prevented if the Israelis left, no?

I wonder how many have died since Israel was created?"

By the same token less of US would die if we just left America. I know that there have been something in the neighborhood of 21,000 terrorist attacks on Israel in just the last three years. Collectively 9/11 is but a drop in the bucket compared to Israel. 9/11 to them is just another day on a smaller scale.”

“Sorry, didn’t mean to skirt the question there. Well, we have supported democracy there through Israel. Nigal
10:50:45 AM
08/30/04

No problem, today I have the attention span of a child going through Ritalin withdrawal!

Has "supporting democracy" stabilized the Middle East? Seems like it's destabilized.

As for what have they done for us - well they're not shoving their fists up our butts!

Other than that - gotta love falafel and hookhas!”

“You can not compare The creation of Israel vs America”

“"Has "supporting democracy" stabilized the Middle East? Seems like it's destabilized."


We have to remember that Israel as a modern state is still in it’s infancy. Did many of the things France did to support us at the birth of our nation stabilize the region? OK, that’s a bit of stretch but I think you get my meaning. I’m not saying Israel isn’t partly to blame but we must lay the bulk of the blame at the feet of those who refused their statehood when it was offered.

But my question to you remains… Why would you speak out so loudly when people are being slaughtered in the Sudan while the world watches yet you suggest we pull out and allow the exact same thing to happen in the mid-east? Suggesting that the Jews simply leaving would solve the problem is beyond ludicrous to me. Just give up the nation?”

“"You can not compare The creation of Israel vs America"

LOL! Didn't see this until I already posted!”

“but we must lay the bulk of the blame at the feet of those who refused their statehood when it was offered.

But my question to you remains… Why would you speak out so loudly when people are being slaughtered in the Sudan while the world watches yet you suggest we pull out and allow the exact same thing to happen in the mid-east? Suggesting that the Jews simply leaving would solve the problem is beyond ludicrous to me. Just give up the nation?"
Nigal
11:03:21 AM
08/30/04

Refused their statehood? How was their statehood created? Who "voted" for this? The Palestinians? This maneuver was mind numbingly stupid and arrogent with no thought of the consequences. Actually, I wonder if some didn't realize what they were doing but felt obligated none the less to create Israel.

Now, I guess the Israelis will never leave, eh? But they can certainly take care of themselves and always have. We should pull out of the Middle East.

I'm not skirting the issue, I don't think there would be a slaughter. We are not stabilizing the region by being there.

And Sudan isn't an aggressor against another country, but against a people within their borders and with no way of protecting themselves.

BTW - Anyone hear about what's going on in the Congo?”

“"We should pull out of the Middle East......"

Sorry, but we ain't going no where, while our country sucks off the pipe of our oil masters.....”

“Are Israelis hot? I could sponsor a few. In the interest of World peace, of course.”

“I dated a few Jewish women back in the day. It was interesting to say the least.”

“Jewish American? Dated one once.......Once!”

“If you really want to make a difference send a Jew a pizza! Hold the ham and bacon please!”

“Oh, they grow'em nice up here in Michigan land. Very pretty and *very* outgoing with the goyim boys...

go figure.....!”

“The one I dated was beyond uptight.


Ngal - wtf? 1 pizza for 5 soldiers? Are these "mini-soldiers"?”

“I heard those Geman Baptists are the wildest women. Back in school when all the GeeBees were allowed to sew their wild oats, they were the most popular girls for a few years. LOL!”

“"The one I dated was beyond uptight......"


Maybe born a little too late?

The last Ortho all-girls school musical I did last year, I had to beat those girls off of my male goyim students with a boom stick.”

“Perhaps. Although she didn't resist my......techniques.

Man this is bringing back horrible memories. She actually said something to the effect: "pretty good, huh"? I can't even tell you the details that make this statement completely audacious.

I lied through my teeth!”

“Spy Probe Scans Neo Con-Israel Ties

Jim Lobe


SEATTLE, Aug 31 (IPS) - The burgeoning 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 FBI and Pentagon investigations of close collaboration between prominent U.S. neo-conservatives and Israel dating back some 30 years.

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.

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 United States, 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 last 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 U.S. 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 U.S. agencies that could have detected or foiled the Sep. 11, 2001 attack.

The FBI is reportedly also involved in the Pentagon's investigation, which is overseen by Deputy Undersecretary of Defence for International Technology Security John A ”Jack” Shaw with the explicit support of Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

The latest incident is based on allegations that a Defence 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 U.S. 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 co-operating 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 U.S. government for a confrontational posture vis-à-vis Iran and Syria, including actions aimed at destabilising both governments -- policies which, in addition to the ousting of Hussein, have been strongly and publicly urged by prominent, hard-line 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 favour, 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 defence for international security policy (ISP), which, among other responsibilities, had an important say in approving or denying licenses to export sensitive military or dual-use technology abroad, hired him 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 United States and Israel and one in which Perle, Feith and Ledeen have long been active.

In his position as Perle's deputy, Bryen created the Defence Technology Security Administration (DTSA) which enforced regulations regarding technology transfer to foreign countries.

During his tenure, according to one source with personal knowledge of Bryen's work, ”the U.S. 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” -- 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 U.S. 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 authorised 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 U.S. weapons system to an Arab government to an Israeli official via an AIPAC staffer.

In 1992, when he was serving as undersecretary of defence for policy, Pentagon officials looking into the unauthorised 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 to, in the words of a 'New York Times' story Sunday, ”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.”

“No condemnation for the recent bus bombing attacks on Israelis? Yet this "scandal" merits a post.

Typical Jew-hating hypocrisy, trotted out yet again by one of our resident AINOs.”