Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘larry-franklin’

Steve Rosen’s Double Life: Pimping for Israel, Trolling Craigslist for Gay Sex

Tuesday, November 16th, 2010
craig's list sex services

Steve Rosen's 'craving' for Craig's List sex listings

The transcripts of depositions (warning: this is a single pdf page containing hundreds of pages of transcripts with no easy way of navigating through it) in Steve Rosen’s $20 million defamation case against his former employer, Aipac, are just becoming public as both sides ratchet up pressure on the other and manuever for legal advantage.  I pride myself that almost nothing anyone can tell me about Aipac would shock.  But this material goes way beyond that.  It includes a little of everything: salacious sex, computer porn, clandestine meetings with Israeli agents (aka diplomats), angry confrontations with FBI agents threatening arrest, references to Jonathan Pollard and even Alfred Dreyfuss.

When I first got this material from a source I wrote back and said: can Steve Rosen really have used Craig’s List to procure anonymous gay sex from other married men?  But alas, it’s true and spoken in Rosen’s own words.

So where to start: Aipac’s lawyers made a summary judgment motion earlier this month asking the judge to dismiss the last remaining claim in the case.  As part of its motion, Aipac deliberately dumped all the previous deposition transcripts into the public domain.  Here are the primary findings for those keeping score at home:

1. Steve Rosen, a man married five times, arranged for anonymous sex trysts via Craig’s List (not that dissimilar from Sen. Larry Craig’s MO) and even conceded to Aipac’s deposing attorney he may’ve used the organization’s own computers to do so.  That’s OK, he argues because Howard Kohr and Kohr’s secretary viewed pornographic images in the workplace and pubicly regaled their fellow workers with them.

2. Steve Rosen spent much, if not most of his work time, recruiting federal employees, mostly at the Department of Defense, to reveal classified information that would be of interest to Israel.  When he recruited such an employee or secured such information he pretty much went directly to his “handlers” in the Israeli embassy to whom he passed the information or contact.  The very first person with whom he met after being the FBI confronted him and warned that he might be arrested was NOT his own attorney or anyone from Aipac, but the deputy director of the Israeli embassy.  Such warning, allowed Israel to roll up its espionage-intelligence operation and spirit Naor Gillon out of DC so he would not be arrested and thus embroil Israel directly in the controversy. As the Forward notes in its report, this fact may be a very important one since if Rosen was following the procedures and directives of Aipac in summoning the Israeli for the meeting and warning him about the investigation, then Aipac is in effect an accessory to Israeli intelligence operations in this country and not a fully independent American lobbying venture.

3. After Aipac fired Rosen (and his colleague Keith Weissman), Aipac’s wealthiest and most powerful donors lined up behind Rosen and raised nearly $1-million that was distributed to him over the four year period until the government dismissed its case against him.  Some gifts were even bundled by two major fundraising leaders, just as they might be in a political campaign.  The gifts were structured so that neither Rosen nor the donors would have to report them on their IRS tax forms, with checks made out to Rosen, his wife and three children to skirt minimum gift reporting levels.

Let’s be straight here, so to speak: if Steve Rosen wants to engage in furtive sex that’s his business.  It should only be a footnote to the overall weirdness of this story.  But what is important about this is that Steve Rosen, who wrote this memorable phrase in a memo to M.J. Rosenberg:

A lobby is like a midnight flower, it thrives in the dark and wilts in the light.

Which means that Aipac itself and Rosen professionally led precisely the same types of lives that the latter did privately.  In other words, he lived a lie which he perpetrated on his wives and children.  He presented himself as something he wasn’t in order to cater to whatever personal or sexual demons might’ve been like hellhounds on his trail.  Aipac’s offices as described by Rosen in his deposition sound more like a bawdy house than a place where serious work was done.  He alludes to fellow employees and directors regaling each other with stories about prostitutes.  All of it gives the lie to Aipac as a high-toned serious organization.

Anyone who knew Steve Rosen personally or by reputation had to know he was one sleazy dude (though I have heard one former Aipac staffer speak fondly of him). The information above only confirms that he practiced such sleaziness both in his professional and personal life. There will be those among Aipac’s supporter who will attempt to dissociate themselves from Rosen: he was fired when the organization discovered he’d disgraced its principles, etc. But this is nonsense. I do agree with Rosen in at least one major respect: he was doing his job precisely as Aipac wanted him to. Howard Kohr knew every top secret document Rosen lifted from the defense department files and he knew what Rosen did with the information in those memos. He knew every reporter Rosen tempted with tidbits, he knew every Israeli embassy handler with whom Rosen met to further his and Israel’s intelligence harvesting agenda. In that sense, Rosen was Aipac and Aipac, Rosen. As Israel’s ass-lickingest Congress members like to say about the Israel-U.S. relationship: “there wasn’t any daylight between them” in this regard.

For those of you who wonder what the average day of an Aipac policy staffer might be like take a look at this calendar as laid out by the FBI in its investigation:
rosen deposition transcript

I’m not foolish enough to believe that the FBI’s portrayal of Steve Rosen’s work might not be the full story of what he did for a living. But knowing everything else I know about both Rosen, his reputation and Aipac’s I’ve got to say that this schedule probably isn’t that far wrong.

The man himself confirms some of our worst fears through his own words. When he sits down with Israel’s deputy chief of mission, Rafi Barak, to tell him that Larry Franklin and Naor Gillon’s cover have been blown, the first analogy that comes to mind to convey the gravity of the situation is saying this is a Pollard situation. In other words, when the shit hit the fan Rosen thought of the likening the case in which he was involved to the most damaging American Jewish spy to have fed secrets to the Israelis in the history of both our nations.

At another point when he is taking with the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler about a possible story and feeding him some classified government information he thanks his lucky stars that there is no Official Secrets Act in the U.S. In other words, he is thankful that neither he nor Kessler can be prosecuted by the federal government for such leaks though in England they could be. In all of his work, Rosen speaks of himself in the language of espionage and spies. Whether what he did was legal or not, it is telling to view matters the way he did. It tells you a great deal about how he saw himself and how he saw Aipac’s role.

Aipac’s argument is always, we do what every other lobby inside the Beltway does, or wishes it had the skills or resources to do. And they have a point. They may not be quite the evil villains people like Grant Smith paint them to be. They after all are exercising their constitutional right to petition the government regarding public policy. That’s not my quarrel with Aipac. My quarrel is that they step right up the red lines of proper lobbyist behavior and then cross over. Then they dare anyone to call them on it. And that includes presidents, the Justice Department and the FBI.

Curiously, even though Aipac fired Rosen and Weissman apparently because they peddled a story based on classified intelligence to a Post reporter, the group had no specific policy at the time prohibiting such conduct.  Now it does.  Which is interesting, and makes me wonder how it will continue to handle its little escapades with government sources.  I’m guessing one way it might handle this, is to pass information directly from its sources to the Israelis bypassing the “middleman.”  Though this may possibly put the sources into greater legal jeopardy since I presume it would harder to prosecute them for leaking to Aipac than to the Israeli government.

In his own deposition, Howard Kohr claims he never knew nor approved of Aipac receiving classified government documents.  He also claims (and I don’t believe him) this was the case throughout his tenure.  Which is convenient because at least one of his predecessors notes that he did know of such Aipac activities during his tenure.  When you want history on these issues, best to go back to Larry Cohler Esses’ archives.  He wrote in Jewish Week in 2005:

Thomas Dine, a former executive director of AIPAC, confirmed this week that during his tenure Steven Rosen, the lobby’s foreign policy director until April, informed him of his success in gaining access to a highly classified document…Dine said federal agents investigating Rosen unearthed a memo from 1983, soon after Rosen’s arrival at AIPAC, in which Rosen boasted about his access to a comprehensive, classified review of U.S. policy in the Middle East.

…AIPAC and federal prosecutors have depicted Rosen as a lone ranger. His superiors at AIPAC have said that until recently they were ignorant of his alleged pursuit of classified information.

The last major group to be deeply embarrassed by these revelations will be the fatcat leadership cadre which anted up hundreds of thousands to shut Rosen up or keep him happy. The donor list is a virtual Who’s Who of American Jewry’s wealthiest and most powerful: Larry Hochberg ($200K bundled), Lynn and Stacy Schusterman ($18K), Haim Saban ($100K), Walter Stern, Daniel Abraham ($75K), Ralph Goldman, Randall Levitt, Newton Becker (~$200K). It’s not clear what the motivation for the payments was: rewarding Rosen’s loyalty, keeping him quiet, expression of kindness to someone in need.

Again, turning to Cohler-Esses contemporaneous reporting in Jewish Week in 2005, these same donors appear to have approached Mort Klein of ZOA and asked if he’d hire Rosen with the donors picking up the tab.  Somewhat surprisingly, knowing Klein’s usual recklessness, he declined citing the near insanity of hiring someone about to be indicted by the feds.

Former Aipac officers told the Jewish Week reporter that the Aipac donors’ motivation may be to cover Aipac’s ass by covering Rosen’s:

“I’m sure there’s a concern Steve would reveal everything he knows about AIPAC” in a trial, said the former official. “The concern is not just violations of law but also from a political angle; they don’t want the inner workings of the lobby laid out.”

This ex-official said Rosen also might reveal information that could leave AIPAC with other, unrelated legal problems. These included potential violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and Federal Elections Commission regulations, he said.

Another former official opined, “Their biggest worry right now is if the case against Rosen and Weissman becomes a case against AIPAC. They’re terrified the feds will get Rosen to flip. If they’re putting up the money for his next job — well, Steve Rosen is not a wealthy guy.”

Whatever the motivation, the way in which the payments were structured were designed to conceal them from scrutiny by the public or IRS. Checks were given not just to Rosen, but to his wife and children in order to keep the threshhold below the minimum required for reporting for tax purposes. This also meant that Rosen himself didn’t have to report them as income to the IRS.

I find the fact that America’s wealthiest Jews were eager to reward a man for eliciting top secret information from the federal government and giving it to Israel is at the least unseemly. You can spin this any way you want and Hochberg et al undoubtedly will, but this was something more than helping a guy when he’s down and out. This was protecting their own organization when it looked like it too might get dragged into the mud by the government. It was save Rosen’s ass, save Aipac’s.

In deposition, Aipac questioned Rosen about these gifts seeking to argue disingenuously that they somehow accrued to Aipac’s credit. As if, contrary to Rosen’s claim that his firing destroyed his ability to earn a living (which it did), these gifts by these Aipac donors proved the group was still on his side and therefore couldn’t possibly be seeking to harm his reputation.

What did Steve Rosen get for his 23 years at Aipac? Nearly $5-million in lawyer’s fees paid out begrudgingly, $144,000 in severance, and six months COBRA coverage. That’s it. A measly $6,000 for every year of service after he fell on his sword for the group. Frankly, I can’t see how they’re going to get out of this lawsuit without paying him a few mill. It seems the least these jackals can do for a fellow jackal.

A couple of stray oddities in all this that are worth mentioning. When Aipac’s attorney tells Rosen they found pornography on his computer he professes not to know how it got there. Did he surf porn websites? Sure, doesn’t everybody? But he never did anything that would’ve caused anything to have been downloaded on his work computer. It’s like Bill Clinton saying he didn’t inhale. How does he think the files got there? Did they worm their way into his PC unbidden? Rosen even volunteers that he didn’t watch videos (God forbid), only looked at pictures. As if that somehow sounds better. But of course he viewed videos. How else do files get on a computer? They’re downloaded. And when you watch a video it’s downloaded to your PC. The other way a file is downloaded is if you manually copy an image to your hard drive and it’s very possible Steve did that though he claims he was a choir boy in that regard: he looked but he didn’t download. He also, to show you what a smart dude he is, points to a Nielsen survey that found that 27% of Americans view porn at work. I swear, where did they get this guy from? Central Casting for jackasses and hypocrites??!

Rosen seems to draw a moral line in the sand concerning pornography. Images of adults are OK, but images of children are not. And Steve wants you to know that he never was into children. OK, now that we know that I somehow feel a whole lot better.

There is a long exchange between Rosen and Aipac’s attorney in which they flail as they attempt to explain to each other the difference between “browse” and “view.” It’s amusing because they fall all over each other at first asking a question, then seeing whether the other guy can answer it himself so as not to embarrass the questioner too much. Guys, you “browse” the web. You don’t browse images (unless you’re on the Google Images site–& hey, maybe that’s where Steve was). You “view” an image.

The Forward’s own report on these depositions quotes Rosen warning Aipac: “You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet.” He claims that his own filings later this month will put to shame the dirt Aipac exposed about him and his personal life. I can hardly wait. But I warn readers to put on a shower cap when you read this stuff so it doesn’t get dumped on your head on the way down.

Did Aipac Shill for Jane Harman?

Monday, October 23rd, 2006

Looks like Aipac has gone and jumped into hot water again. It seems like only yesterday when Larry Franklin, Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman were front page news after it was discovered that Franklin shared information about U.S. policy toward Iran with the Aipac staffers under the watchful and supportive eye of a senior Israeli embassy officer. As an outgrowth of that investigation, Time Magazine reveals that the Justice Department and FBI are now investigating whether Harman enlisted the pro-Israel group to lobby House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi to reappoint the former to her current House Intelligence Committee post.

jane harman speaks at aipac eventJane Harman speaks to Phoenix Aipac event (credit: Mark Glucksman)

…FBI and Justice Department prosecutors…are examining whether Rep. Jane Harman of California and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) may have violated the law in a scheme to get Harman reappointed as the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, according to knowledgeable sources in and out of the U.S. government.

The sources tell TIME that the investigation by Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation…is examining whether Harman and AIPAC arranged for wealthy supporters to lobby House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on Harman’s behalf.

The Post and Haaretz are of slightly different minds about the legal issues involved. First, Haaretz writes that:

Attempting to influence the outcome of the election of Congressional representatives to committees is a federal offense.

While the Post says this about one of the important lobbying calls made on Harman’s behalf by an Aipac donor:

A congressional source tells TIME that the lobbying for Harman has included a phone call several months ago from entertainment industry billionaire and major Democratic party contributor Haim Saban…A phone call pushing for a particular member’s committee assignment might be unwelcome, but it would not normally be illegal on its own.

The key phrase here is “on its own.” In other words, if Haim Saban made the call unsolicited by Aipac, then it would be kosher. If not, then possibly (or definitely?) it would be illegal according to the terms laid out by Haaretz. I’ve got news for you–anyone who believes that Haim Saban did this of his own volition and without prompting from anyone in Harman’s or Aipac’s offices is either a member of Harman’s immediate family or a card-carrying member of Aipac. The rest of us know better.

The probe is covering an even more troubling issue:

The sources say the probe also involves whether, in exchange for the help from AIPAC, Harman agreed to help try to persuade the Administration to go lighter on the AIPAC officials caught up in the ongoing investigation. If that happened, it might be construed as an illegal quid pro quo, depending on the context of the situation.

This sounds like a very difficult issue to prove in court. But if there’s even a hint of evidence that this might’ve happened, then Harman has doomed her chance to become chair of the House Intelligence Committee if the Dems become a majority. It never ceases to amaze me how powerful people don’t seem to recognize the fine line between assertiveness and overplaying one’s hand in the fine art of political gamesmanship. Pelosi clearly hated Harman’s pushiness and would be only too happy to replace her:

…Congressional sources say Pelosi has been infuriated by pressure from some major donors lobbying on behalf of Harman. In a story touching on tensions between Pelosi and Harman, an alternative California publication, LA Weekly, reported in May that Harman “had some major contributors call Pelosi to impress upon her the importance of keeping Jane in place. According to these members, this tactic, too, hasn’t endeared Harman to Pelosi.”

And lest you think it odd, out of character or improbable that Aipac would entertain such a request from Harman, consider what Aipac’s Steve Rosen offered to do on Larry Franklin’s behalf:

The Justice Department alleges in its indictment of Franklin that he asked one of the two AIPAC lobbyists to “put in a good word” for him in seeking assignment to the National Security Council. The document says the AIPAC official noted that such a job would put Franklin “by the elbow of the President” and said he would “do what I can.”

It’s the “I scratch your back, you scratch mine” world of D.C. scrounging, bowing and scraping. It makes one wonder what else a beholden member of Congress might be willing to do for Aipac and its enabler (or “handler” if you’re even more conspiratorial), the Israeli intelligence service Mosad.

Billmon wrote a good piece on this story a few days ago.

AIPAC Spying Trial to Begin in April

Sunday, February 26th, 2006

I just wrote a post about AIPAC’s big annual bash, better known as the AIPAC Policy Conference, that begins March 5th in D.C. They’ll bring 5-6,000 of their biggest fat-cat boosters to D.C. to hobnob with fawning members of Congress eager for campaign largess. The prime rib of red meat for this conference will be AIPAC’s proposed Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act (H.R. 4681), which will draw the noose ever tighter around Palestinian necks in a vain effort to destroy Hamas and the PA. Speaking of red meat, Dick Cheney will be the “Special Guest” for the Closing Session.

Steve RosenSteve Rosen, fired number 2 AIPAC staffer (photo: Jewish Week)

One of my deep background confidants who’s been known to frequent some of the same haunts as aforesaid AIPACniks points me to an even more important calendar date. Sometime in late April, the trial of Keith Weissman and Steve Rosen will begin. They’re the fellows accused of inducing Pentagon analyst, Larry Franklin to provide secret U.S. intelligence about Iran to an Israeli embassy officer. In other words, they’re spies (oops, ‘alleged’ spies). If not spies, then they were aiding and abetting.

AIPAC wants you to forget all about its connection to this heinous incident. That’s why it wants the Policy Conference to be as big a barnstormer as can be–in order to inoculate themselves from the toxin of the trial. But, as the Forward notes, it may not work:

Defense attorneys will try to establish that the men were following the organization’s routine practice and that Aipac’s top officials were fully aware of their actions. “The evidence in this case will show that Dr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman always acted in Aipac’s interests, never were on their own and acted with the knowledge and approval of their superiors,” Rosen’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, told the Forward.

…Defense attorneys are expected to argue that receiving information from administration officials was something the two were paid and encouraged to do, and something Aipac routinely does — as do many other lobbying groups in Washington.

“It is very possible” that attorneys for Rosen and Weissman will call senior Aipac officials to testify in court, sources familiar with the case told the Forward. Such testimony would undoubtedly be embarrassing to Aipac, according to several sources familiar with the case.

…The defense’s intention to bring Aipac into the courtroom — both physically and figuratively — is causing concern and resentment within the organization, sources close to Aipac said.

As far as AIPAC’s concerned, Rosen and Weissman were rogue staffers with a personal mission to assist Israeli intelligence. AIPAC didn’t put them up to it. AIPAC doesn’t endorse what they did. AIPAC fired them when it found out. Blah, blah, blah.

My confidant says “don’t you believe it.” S/He tells me that (at least in his informed opinion) the government’s “got the goods” both on the staffers and AIPAC. S/He’s hoping for a “hanging judge and jury.” Can’t say as I blame him/her.

This Jewish Week article raises serious doubts about how much separation AIPAC really has from Rosen. JTA published this February 2nd piece about the federal judge, T.S. Ellis III, who quadrupled Larry Franklin’s recommended sentence from four to twelve years. Apparently, Ellis has warned Rosen, Weissman and any other civilians to whom they may’ve passed information that they may be as culpable as Franklin even though they are civilians (not government employees).

Be prepared too for a full frontal attack on Paul McNulty, the federal prosecutor trying the case. Just a matter of time before we hear Malcolm Hoenlein and his ilk accusing him of anti-Semitism and attempting to damage the reputation of the entire Jewish community in the eyes of the word, etc.

Justin Raimondo attempts to place this spying scandal in the context of what he sees as AIPAC (and hence, Israeli) infiltration of the higest level of the Pentagon in the persons of Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz and others connected with AIPAC’s think tank, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Read my past posts about AIPAC and the spying scandal.

Israel Accused of Running Spy at Highest Pentagon Levels

Friday, August 27th, 2004
israeli_spy

(credit: CBS/AP)

CBS News broadcast a bombshell on tonight’s Evening News (FBI Probes Pentagon Spy Case) with Dan Rather reporting that an official working with Douglas Feith, the number 3 Pentagon official under Don Rumsfeld, passed highly sensitive secret documents regarding U.S. policy toward Iran to staff of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, who in turned passed the documents to Israeli intelligence (see Pentagon Official Is Suspected of Giving Israel Secrets from today’s New York Times). If true, this would be a devestating development for all parties, agencies and governments concerned. The case raises all sorts of questions and alarm bells regarding U.S.-Israeli relations and U.S. relations with the Arab world.

The DOD is attempting to minimize the damage by saying the alleged spy was not in a policy-making position, so no need to worry:

“The investigation involves a single individual at D.O.D. at the desk officer level, who was not in a position to have significant influence over U.S. policy,” the statement continued. “Nor could a foreign power be in a position to influence U.S. policy through this individual.

But this begs the question–you don’t need to be in a “policy-making position” to cause enormous damage to U.S. interests.

Israel issued a flat out denial:

A spokesman for the Israeli Embassy, David Siegel, denied the accusations of espionage. “They are completely false and outrageous,” he said.

“The United States is Israel’s most cherished friend and ally,” Mr. Siegel said. “We have a strong ongoing relationship at all levels, and in no way would Israel do anything to impair this relationship.”

False and outrageous? Knowing the closeness of American-Israeli relations and the strength of AIPAC within the political establishment, do the Israelis really think that the Justice Department would have gone public with this without an ironclad case? Come on!

First, how could Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Feith allow an Israeli agent to infiltrate the deepest recesses of the Pentagon? They’ve been investigating the case for a year. Just think how much longer it could’ve gone on before they detected it and what other secrets this individual might have revealed before he was suspected? Even without this potentially devestating scandal, Arabs and many others believed that these individuals toed a totally pro-Israel line in their policy considerations. What will they think now?

Next, what could the Israelis be thinking? Didn’t they receive enough of a black eye for running Jonathan Pollard within Navy Intelligence? The Times article even implies that there have been subsequent cases of Israeli spying within U.S. government agencies which have either not been pursued or prosecuted because of the sensitivity of the American-Israeli relationship:

Several officials said that a number of espionage investigations involving Israel had been dropped or suppressed in the past in the face of political pressure.

As an American Jew who wishes to see Israel living within a peaceful Mideast, I am deeply troubled and disgusted with Israel’s actions in this case.

On the one hand, you can argue that this is what nations do. They’ve been doing it since God knows when and they’ll continue doing it until the end of time or at least of nations. According to this perspective, Israel is doing what is right for its national interests. After all, Iran’s nuclear weapons program is of increasing concern to Israel and if it were to feel it needed to take military action against Iran, then it would certainly need all the intelligence it could get both about Iranian weapons programs and U.S. policy toward them.

But on the other hand, the amount of damage that a case like this can do not only the U.S.-Israeli relations, but to U.S. standing in the Arab world is catastrophic. As I said above, we’re already at the nadir in the eyes of Muslims. How much lower can we go? I guess we’ll find out as this case works itself out.

U.S. Midest policy is seen not only among Arabs, but among many others throughout the world as either in Israel’s pocket or totally ineffectual. Now, everyone who feels this way will say that U.S. policy has been rendered so ineffectual by the work of an Israeli spy (or spies) within the U.S. government’s highest echelons. Who can blame them for feeling this way?

Finally, what does this scandal do to the standing of AIPAC both on the Hill and within the American Jewish community? AIPAC is a Goliath when it comes to influencing U.S. policy toward Israel. It has the almost universal support of the American Jewish community and most U.S. political leaders march in lock step with its policies. Personally, I believe that AIPAC has an absolutely toxic affect on U.S.-Israel relations because it suffocates discussion of a wide range of issues in a dispassionate and open-handed way. In AIPAC’s world, there is only one way of thinking about Israel and that is their way. If you break out of lockstep you will pay a price.

I have written here critically about AIPAC:
AIPAC: We Support the Road Map. Or Do We?
AIPAC & the Road Map: Undermining Bush Policy

What did I get for my troubles? An unsolicited copy of one of their press releases which “proved” that they did indeed support the Road Map. They sent the press release to my home and did not enclose any note that would indicate who sent it. I thought it was incredibly smarmy for an organization to send an unsolicited document to someone’s private home. But that’s what AIPAC does. Anything is justified in pursuit of what they view as Israel’s interests.

I wonder whether AIPAC will pay a price for the behavior of the two employees who allegedly passed on the information to Israel. Will members of Congress continue to pay obeisance to AIPAC? Will George Bush continue to run all of his major Mideast initiatives (such as they are) past AIPAC? Will AIPAC itself do a “cheshbon nefesh” (internal accounting) and reconsider the role that it and its employees played? My answers to all these questions are profoundly doubtful. I’m afraid that after a few months everything will return to normal, just as after the Pollard affair. American Jews will even begin organizing to demand the release of the Pentagon spy by saying he/she was a ‘Jewish patriot.’ Nothing will have changed.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE