Israeli spy at pentagon
 

Pentagon aide suspected of spying for Israel

Last Updated Fri, 27 Aug 2004 22:44:59 EDT

WASHINGTON - The FBI is investigating a Pentagon official suspected of spying for Israel and providing the country with classified materials including secret White House plans on Iran, according to reports.

CBS News reported that the investigation involved wiretaps, undercover surveillance and photography.

The suspected spy is alleged to be an analyst at the Pentagon who worked in the office of Douglas Feith, the undersecretary of defence for policy. Feith is a key aide to Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

The scheme is alleged to have involved employees at the pro-Israeli lobbying group in Washington – the American-Israeli Political Action Committee.

Investigators are looking into whether the Pentagon analyst passed on information to AIPAC, which then allegedly gave those materials to the Israeli government.

AIPAC spokesman Josh Block said that any allegation of criminal conduct by the organization or its employees is "baseless and false."

The materials allegedly provided to Israel included a draft plan on U.S. policy toward Iran.

David Siegel, a spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, said: "We categorically deny these allegations. They are completely false and outrageous."

Written by CBC News Online staff

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/nation...spy040827.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Well so much for homeland security.

It seems the Israeli's aren't content being spoon fed by the American's to their every whim so they have to dig deeper, if such is the case. Any bets that Rumsfeld has a secret bank account in Jerusalem waiting for him?

I say the Americans will be in Iran mid 2005 if Bush wins. Afterall, America has to protect the Holy Land and its chosen people. Oil you say? Ha Ha Ha. Try harder.

What are your thoughts? What punishment should the U.S seek against Israel if such is the case?

I know it is laughable that the U.S will find the balls to stand up to Israel but should this be an election issue, afterall this is homeland security we are talking about.

What do you say this disappears and becomes a non-issue and is discussed for no more than a day and as a side note?

Not the first time Isreal has been caught spying on us, makes me wonder why. I mean after all we are their greatest protecter and ally.

Hope and pray we don't go into Iran, they have nukes and have already said if we go in they WILL use them.

I agree something should be done about Israel and them spying on us. Very few people know they attacked and sank an intelligence ship back in the '60s. No one has publicly stated why, they just as quickly as possible swept it under the carpet.

No clue why we allow them to get away with what they do. Granted they're our only real friend in the area and only true democratic republics in the area, but that's why we should hold them to higher standards.

If I were president one of my first actions would be to announce that the US will now abstain from every vote dealing with isreal in the UN.

I can't stand isreal and their insensitivity to the world. It truely is a shame that they feel the need to spy on us. All they do is stir up shit in the middle east and it ends up splashing in our face. If we let them sort things for themself (cut off funding, abstain from votes, ect) the muslim world would look on us more favorably.

Israel is the most paranoid nation on earth. The fact that they spy on their biggest ally and friend is incredibly stupid. If America decided to stop supporting them and called in their debts then Israel would collapse in under 3 years.

Why would Israel need to spy on the US??
Seems...redundant.

With friends like these...

naww, jk. does this really surprise anybody? it's pure speculation, but i'd wager we have just the same level of spy activity in our allied country. I live near an AF base. the local OSI (Office of Special Investigation, kind of like a military CIA) has openly complained of the french perpetually spying on the installation.

This will be swept under the carpet in a few days, im suprised it even got out.

I agree we will go to war with Iran very soon, and the middle east conflict isn't truly about Oil, its about Israel.

hahaha, yeah, it's perfectly okay to have US spies all over the world in other countries, but god forbid someone spy on us! :lol:

Ahh, good stuff.

If we take a pitbull that likes us and stick it into a cage of 8 or 9 german shepherds that don't like us and let the german shepherds eat the pitbull, yeah, the other dogs are gonna like us more.

Remember, as much as Israel seems a bit jumpy and paranoid, they have their reasons for it.

If you think we don't spy on Israel or England and vice versa, you crazy!

Ohh I see so were supposed to continue to let Isreal walk all over the muslim world? I'm sorry but Isreal has caused us an enormous amount of greif and it is only going to get worse. Much of the hatred to the US from the muslim world comes from the unequivical support for Isreal. Reguardless of what Isreal does we ALWAYS veto anything in the security council dealing with them. It is obvious that we cannot be unbiased in this situation. If 99% of the nations in the US come out against Isreal and we veto it don't you think there is a problem?

This country was founded on democracy. Yet today as soon as it doesn't fit our needs we throw democracy in the drain. It is hypocritical of us and we need to stop it. Isreal can stand up for itself, it needs to learn how to play nice and if it takes a few bloody noses for them to learn that i'm all for it.

my guess is that you have no real idea about the recent history of the middle east. while by no means has everything isreal has done concerning it's neighbors been great or good, at most they're accountable for 50% of the blame. they managed to sign a peace treaty with egypt, and guess waht? no problems since? and they might have to get some black eyes? sorry, but they've already beat up on the arab neighbors enough, i doubt that'll change in future attacks.

No offense, but you're not exactly an Unbiased source.

If this were any other country, we would be up in arms, and readying the gunships.

I suppose I could just say, Israel is, at least, 50% to blame.

But the real issue is that the U.S. gov't does not handle the situation that way. On the contrary, Israel can do almost no wrong in the eyes of the U.S. gov't - and this is not a new policy, though it has been amplified since 9-11.

Israel has never agreed to the U.N. mandates which brought them into existence. On the contrary, they have consistently pushed the bar in taking from the Palestinians (I call them Palestinians because before Israel came into existence, the area, controlled by Britain, was referred to as Palestine) while turning around and offering back a pitance of whatever they have taken and demanding the Palestinians acquiesce. They then call this "negotiation" and "compromise" and the U.S. gov't (and to a large part, the media) certify it as such. And when partial representatives of the Palestinians balk or fail to comply with these "compromises", they are considered hard-headed and unwilling to achieve peace.

The simple reality is, Israel's tactics are ones of major aggression.

And to top it off, they have nukes. Which the U.S. gov't turns a blind-eye towards. It's borderline comical that the U.S. pretends to have a nuclear non-proliferation policy while doing nothing to remove them from Israel's hands. Israel has absolutely no need for nukes - the allied status with the U.S., and its' own arsenal is enough. The last thing this world needs is nukes in the control of Iran - and the first step towards preventing them from attaining them is to remove them from Israel's control. Anything less and Iran is stuck in a Cold War scenario of defense.

Sir have you ever really read up on the history of the Menidat Y'sreal? In their short existence, 55 +/- years, they have been attacked 3 times by foreign invading armies, often times by as many as 8 Arab countries. They were a major player in the cold war, having read up on the cold war middle east you would know that. Israel has historically only taken gains after aggression, and constantly used said gains to broker peace with said aggresive Arab neighbors.

Palestine may historically have been the name of the territory occupied by Britain, but their is no Palestinian culture, their is no Palestinian people (historically). Palestine never had any land, having never truly been a nation (even if you disagree with Israel, we all know that the Palestinian people exist), legally they were never a true nation onto their own, historically being under control of Jordan (West Bank) and Gaza (Egypt). Has it turns out today those are the only two Arab Nations Israel has a peace treaty with, and respectively the Palestinian territories are under the control of the respective nations, but then you have the occupation which is a whole nother can of worms.

Lastly your who speel on Israel's nukes is complete and utter bullshit, it's garbage. Israel has not signed the Nuclear Proliferation treaty, Iran has, don't come here talking that nonsense. Any well informed person knows the UN only has power in respect to concessions of sovereignity, Israel has never afforded it to the UN, good for them. It's all fine and good for us to talk about here, but I suspect if we were living in a country were we have been involved in 5 armed cross-border conflicts in 50 years, life and politics would be different and a little more blurred.

God bless both the palestinian and Israeli people.

Well, let's start at the beginning, shall we?

In 1947, the U.N. decides that Jews will be given a bunch of land. The Palestinians living on that land do not accept that decision. In 1948, Britain ends their mandate of Palestine and refuses to secure the area for Jewish occupation. So the Arabs attack the Jews.

Is that supposed to be suprising or somehow shocking? A group of people have come in and told you the land you live on now belongs to them. There is only one righteous recourse: fight for the right to the land which they are taking from you.

A land without people for a people without land.

There was no such thing as Palestinians; it was not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine considering itself as a Palestine people, and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist. -- Golda Meir

There were nearly 1 million people living in Palestine. Label them anyway you wish - it was their land by possession.This is irrelevant to the discussion. Both sides were used by the U.S. and the Soviets during the Cold War - but the problems between the two countries existed before the Cold War.Israel historically took the land initially. That aggression from Arabs followed is nothing short of pure logic. If you wish to call a retaliatory action an aggressive action, feel free. That Israel then uses the land they take, by offering back only pieces of it, is how Israel has successfully gained the land beyond the 1948 borders that they now control. And it is also used as the propaganda to claim that the Palestinians "refuse to negotiate and don't seek peace". As if Israel does.I did not claim Israel had signed the treaty. I simply stated 3 facts and 1 opinion based on those facts:

1- Israel does not need nukes.
2- As long as Israel has nukes, Iran is required by the laws of Cold War logic to attain them.
3- The U.S. policy of non-proliferation requires Iran to not have nukes.

Therefore, the first step towards ensuring that Iran does not attain nukes is to remove the primary incentive for Iran to attain nukes.

^ Ah logic, its a wonderful thing.

so a group of people with no govt. other than the one run by the brits is started and it's shocking that everyone gets mad? the only reason they got so pissed was because it was the jews who were setting up the new govt.

well, you're right, the land was the inhabitants who possessed it. and if it weren't that there was still a lot of colonial type thinking going on, maybe isreal would never have been created. now when you consider that when isreal was created, they didn't just kick every non-jew out. many of the arab inhabitants became isreali citzens. so why did some become citizens and some not? i don't know, i'm sure they all had reasons? and for those who left, why didn't any of the other arab countries take them in? the places that have been taken in war, as far as i'm concerned, are isreals now. in no other time in history has a country won a war been told to give land gained in said war back, especially a defensive war. the palestinians threw in with the losers, so too bad. i think isreal should treat the palestinains better, but it seems to me that everytime things quiet down, they're the owns who start things back up with a suicide bombing. so i have very little sympathy for them left.

i think isreal does need nukes. if anything, i think that's one of the reasons they have not had an actual war in so long now. as long as they have nukes, other countries will back off. so the logic of these three is faulty from step 1.

i'm actually pretty unbiased. i realize if you take my handle, it's understandable to think that i wouldn't be. to clarify, born jewish, raised jewish, and don't give a damn about being jewish. hannukah harry just amuses me (i love jon lovitz :)). i'm pro-isreal not because of my heritage, but because i agree with the concept of "to the victors go the spoils." if you want to argue about the original land that they were given, fine. but everything they've taken since has been done so in defensive war against attackers. and the "palestinians" threw in with the arabs during those wars and lost. so boo hoo, cry me a river, fuck 'em.

Yes, you must be right. The only reason at all that the people who were about to be dispossessed of their land got pissed is because the people doing the dispossessing were Jews.

Assuredly, that they were Jews played a big part in the problem - but show me any group of people that would happily accept being ruled by some new foreign invader.
I don't even know what you're trying to say right there. The greatest mistake of post-WWII international policy decisions was to blatantly and swiftly decide that the Jews would receive THAT chunk of land. There is simply no justification for it (unless you accept the God-ordained Hebrew ownership of the land - which is not exactly exempalary international politiking).

Why not a chunk of America or the Soviet Union? Both countries had the largest land ownership. Why decide that the people of Palestine simply don't count?
I can't speak for every Arab that stayed, but assuredly there were groups of Arabs in areas of Palestine that refused to fight for their land for any number of reasons. However, the vast majority were forced out. And not suprisingly, the Arabs that live in Israel today are, in many ways, treated as second-class citizens.
Why should anyone be required to go somewhere else? It was their land, they specifically refused to accept the U.N. decision to simply give their land to someone else. If Canada decided to invade Washington State, would you be claiming it was OK and the current residents of Washington State should be absorbed into one of the other states? I highly doubt it.
Well, first of all - there is nothing defensive about Israel's position in any of the wars they have been involved in - unless you discount the initial land-grab of 1948. Everything since then has been based on that - in effect, it has been one long war with hot and cool periods. If Israel TRULY intended for peace, they would not be holding onto land they have subsequently taken. The only possible claim to peaceful endeavors would be if Israel had 1948 borders - and they were then insisting that the Palestinians should agree to the U.N. decisions. Since Israel is not doing that, they are not attempting peace.
This is short-sighted thinking. The Palestinians, in the numerous and distinct groups to which they have been divided by Israel's aggressive tactics, have exceptionally limited methods of retaliation for Israel's aggressive land grabbing tactics. Additionally, and as I have already stated, it is a mockery of truth to claim that Israel is attempting peace and the Palestinians keep throwing up road blocks to that peace by "starting a new war" or "attacking without provocation" - it is not an attempt at peace when your enemy takes your land and offers you half of it back.
Israel doesn't need nukes because none of their enemies have nukes and any aggression against Israel by bordering nations can be handled by the U.S. Threats to Israel are conventional weapons - not nuclear weapons. It's certainly a strong position for Israel to have nukes - but they do not need them to protect themselves. For example, I own a gun to protect myself and my house. I could obtain a bazooka and it would protect me even more - but assuredly, I do not need to have one.

wow did this ever get off topic..

I hope and pray we don't go in as well. Iran will not go out as easily as Iraq and will use nukes. Now of course I hope it doesn't reach that conclusion, but if America decides to attack Iran (and it will only happen if Bushie gets re-elected), I do hope they do use nukes. I don’t want to sound like an America-basher, as I do live here and have no right, but its time they be taught a lesson. And no, 9/11 was not a lesson, just a warning. This is the most hated country on the planet, and they won’t be helping themselves by attacking Iran. I’m not saying I'm glad 9/11 happened and that I hope it happens again, I'm just saying that the U.S has no right to go and destroy as many countries as they please and kill as many people as they please but not expect others to return the favor. 9/11 did not upset me; it didn't make me feel bad for the innocent lives lost, because America takes away those innocent lives of other nations everyday. Nobody seems to give a shit about them though; therefore I don’t give a shit about how many innocent Americans die. I am against war and I am against murder, but I am not against justice...if that sounds hypocritical, so be it.

The most supriseing thing to me is that we caught one. I think it makes perfect sense that Iseral would spy on us, we are one of the biggest and most important factors to their national security. I wouldn't have thought we would ever catch them at it, though.

a) I'm sure we spy on other coutries, too. It's part of intelligence.

b) I bet we invade Syria before Iran

c) If we do invade Iran, they won't dare use nukes, simply, because they know better. *shrug* The amount they have is nothing compared to the amount we have, and their country is smaller and would be annihilated with a much smaller arsenal.

Cut your nose to spite your face?

A wakeup call.

Mod note:

Please keep in mind that no opinion, however unpopular, is ever going to be deleted or edited from this forum when in keeping with the decorum and respect we expect- also, when it is coherently and intelligently presented, and with regard to the feelings the unpopular opinion will undoubtedly elicit. When these qualitites are present, it is our duty to respect the poster's right to have their opinion, however unpopular, without interference from us.

Of course, it is then the duty of those who disagree with it to do so in a similarly intelligent, coherent, and respectful manner. Feel free to pick it apart, but a flaming response will make you the only one who is wrong.

Thank you.

-analog.

Not when Iran has falsely elected "religious" clerics and hardliners controlling it! Iran's government does NOT know any better.

Maybe, but how about expecting others to return the favor for investing millions around the world, building their countries from the ashes of war, helping to feed millions of people who for various reasons cant do it for themselves... I could go on. But wait... the US is the devil and only kill people, so that kind of stuff cant make the news. We all know how Mogadishu started by simply trying to make sure the food got to the people of Somalia instead of the warlords and was reported as us trying to make a regiem change there and got defeated.

Regardless of whether or not Israel is right or wrong OUR taxdollars should benefit people HERE IN THE USA not over there. Where is my kickback from over there??

A lot of aid going to Israel is in loan form, in turn which they spend on American goods.

the primary reason that we have a long-standing policy of supporting israel is that they weren't one of the few governments in the region that didn't align with the soviet union during the cold war. i think that is often not taken into account when examining US/Israeli relations in a historical sense.

What about the positions held by policy writers in our administration? Feith, Perle and Wolfwitz..for example. Are these people loyal to the USA?

My understanding is that most of their aid, and most 'aid' we parcel out around the globe, is in the form of military technology.

This is one of the reasons that many muslims hold us personally culpable for Israeli military aggression--our aid directly arms them and allows them to carry out actions they view as aggressions.

This kind of thinking scares the shit out of me - so by your way of thinking I can come round your house, beat the shit out of you and take everything you own ?
If you bother to learn any history then you will know that whenever the victors in a war are unjust and take too much, then it just breeds hatred and resentment which in turn means more wars and terrorism. One of the main reasons Hitler came to power was the fact he could play on people's resentment and the feeling of being treated unjustly by the Allies after the 1st World War.

i was gonna stay out of htis thread cause i had helped it get off topic for a bit, but i've gotta answer this.

in the case of isreal, they have always been the defender, so yes, to the victors go the spoils. if someone attacks you and they lose, and you rip their shirt, they don't have the right to demand you buy them a new shirt.

and you know anything about history, you'd know that it's not the wars that matter, it's how you treat your conquered subjects. look at the roman empire. they conquered a hell of a lot of people and basically gave them an ultimatum upon defeat... join us or die. most places the newly conquered peoples joined the empire, and rome helped rebuild and bring new technology to those people (aqueducts, paved roads, etc). there were very few places that they had problems with in their empire after conquering, the middle east being one.

You keep saying that, and yet it never seems to become true.

fine, show me a case where they started a war.

1948 - Taking land that belonged to someone else.

That is the entire war - to this day it has not ended.