12 thoughts on “Senior National Security Agency Official Donates $560,000 to Aipac, as NSC and Israel Lobby Denounce Report as ‘Anti-Semitic’ – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. Small wonder that a woman whose grandparents were Holocaust survivors, and whose parents were nearly murdered by anti-Semitic German and Arab terrorists, should be a supporter the State of Israel.

  2. Small wonder that a woman whose grandparents were Holocaust survivors, and whose parents were nearly murdered by anti-Semitic German and Arab terrorists, should be a supporter of the State of Israel.

    1. @ Forrest: And what makes you think Israel and the Holocaust have anything to do with each other? Ben Gurion did very little to save Jews. And Holocaust survivors in Israel have been treated abysmally.

      Neuberger’s grandparents chose to live in the US after they escaped the Holocaust, not Israel. Neuberger is a US citizen. Not an Israeli citizen. Her allegiance should be to the US and not a group which is an agent for a foreign power, Israel.

      And I have no problem with her supporting Israel and Aipac… As long as she’s not a US government official whose duties lie in the very areas in which Israel is penetrating our security.

      1. I didn’t say that Israel has anything to do with the Holocaust, nor do I know how Neuberger’s grandparents came to live in the United States.

        What I believe, is that Jews fleeing oppression should have the option to relocate somewhere in the Diaspora, or, to make Aliyah and live in a Jewish State.

        What I know, is that Neuberger is a dedicated, sworn patriot, whose allegiance should be presumed, and not questioned.

        1. @ Forrest:

          I didn’t say that Israel has anything to do with the Holocaust

          Sure you did. Let me remind you:

          Small wonder that a woman whose grandparents were Holocaust survivors…should be a supporter of the State of Israel.

          Jews and Palestinians fleeing oppression should have the same option. But they don’t, now do they? So I’m all in favor of the Law of Return when you favor the same right for Palestinians. Oh and btw, Israel is not a Jewish state. It is a Judeo-state, a fraudulent representation of Judaism and Jewishness.

          Anyway, I don’t have any problem with a Holocaust survivor making a new home in the US or in Israel. But I do have a problem with one of their children giving half a million dollars to a political lobbying group which enlists spies on behalf of the State of Israel.

          What I know, is that Neuberger is a dedicated, sworn patriot, whose allegiance should be presumed, and not questioned

          First of all, you know nothing of the sort. How do you “know” this? You don’t. Second, your definition of allegiance, dedication and patriotism is far different than mine. Third, no nation should presume anything about their leading cyber security experts. Presumption is foolish on such crucial matters. In intelligence and security matters officials’ patriotism is constantly questioned. As it should be. And that’s what I’m doing. I’m raising extremely serious questions about Neuberger’s judgement. Giving $600,000 to a lobbying group which is essentially an extension of the State of Israel is a very, very bad look for someone sworn to defend the security of the United States.

          You are done in this thread.

  3. Small wonder Jewish people who have survived centuries of ethnic racism have become perpetrators of abuse, torture and violent treatment of Palestinians on their Land. Choice of olive tree as a National symbol is full of contradictions 🔥🔥 Refuse to die in silence

  4. Richard said:

    “Let’s not forget that two employees of Aipac recruited a State Department official to hand over classified documents to an Israeli agent”

    I’m sorry. I thought Larry Franklin reached out to the AIPAC lobbyists, Rosen and Weissman, not the other way around.

    “Viewing the AIPAC lobbyists as well connected, Franklin bypassed his superiors and asked Rosen to convey his concerns on Iran to officials at the National Security Council, to whom he believed the influential lobbyist had access.”

    The FBI set up Rosen and Weissman using Franklin and a bogus classified document.

    He said it was made clear to him [Franklin] by the FBI that Rosen, then AIPAC’s foreign policy director, was the target of the investigation and had been followed by the FBI for years. “The bureau told me Rosen was a bad guy,” he said. Believing that he himself had “done wrong,” Franklin agreed to cooperate with the FBI investigation.

    This cooperation culminated in a June 26, 2003, meeting at an Italian restaurant in Arlington, Va., where Franklin was sent by the FBI to carry out a sting operation against the AIPAC lobbyists. Before his meeting with Weissman, agents wired Franklin with microphones and transmitters and provided him with a fake classified document alleging there was clear life-threatening danger posed to Israelis secretly operating in Iraq’s Kurdish region. Passing on the information would help seal the case against the AIPAC staffers.

    “At the time, I believed they were guilty,” Franklin said of Weissman and Rosen. Yet he still came to the meeting with mixed feelings. He put the document on the table, but hoped Weissman would not reach out for it. “And when he did not take the document, I did breath a silent sigh of relief,” he recalled. In retrospect, Franklin sees that moment as “one I am not proud of.”


    Did I miss something along the way? Who in the American government did Rosen ‘recruit’?

    1. Indictment of Larry Franklin, Steven Rosen, Keith Weissman

      Pentagon Analyst Gets 12 Years for Disclosing Data – NY Times on Jan. 20, 2006.

      Unmaking Their Case – LA Times on Nay 7, 2009.

      Rosen and Weissman were indicted in 2005 under a little-used provision of the 1917 Espionage Act.

      Wouldn’t that cover news reporting of leaked information? We can understand laws to keep government officials from leaking sensitive secrets, but once that information is out, do we really want to start prosecuting journalists and others who publish it? That sounds more like Britain’s Official Secrets Act than an American law consonant with the 1st Amendment.

      How the thinking of Obama/Biden evolved in a few years about leaks and whistleblowers. All men are equal but some are … etc.

    2. @ Sepp: Ah, the selective use of quotations. You seem to have forgotten that since you were quoting me, I would know what I myself wrote, which clearly contradicts your own. So let’s get to the most damning evidence in the FBI depositions which were the basis of my post:

      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.

      As for the Forward article: first, the Forward is supported financially by many of the same individuals who support Aipac. Second, this is Larry Franklin’s account of events. I would never trust the account of someone so intimately involved in the crime. For example, if you believed Shamai Leibowitz, I had nothing to do with the documents he leaked to me from the FBI wiretaps of the Israeli embassy; and he did what he did solely out of a patriotic motive to expose FBI wrongdoing. That’s self-serving in its own twisted way.

      So I would believe what Larry Franklin wrote if it were corroborated by other sources.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *