Caroline Glick
THE JERUSALEM POST
Jan. 31, 2006

The recent conviction of former Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin on
felony charges of mishandling classified US government information
and the passing of classified information to two former senior AIPAC
lobbyists Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman is the proximate cause of
the current crisis. Rosen and Weissman are scheduled to be tried for
misusing classified government information that Franklin purportedly
transferred to them in April.

Franklin, who was sentenced two weeks ago to 12 years and seven
months in prison for his actions, is scheduled to begin serving his
sentence only after he testifies against Rosen and Weissman. If his
testimony is helpful to the prosecution in that case, his sentence
will likely be reduced.

THE CHARGES, both in the case of Franklin and in the case of Rosen
and Weissman are unprecedented. After initial charges of transferring
classified government documents to unauthorized persons were dropped,
Franklin was convicted for keeping classified government documents at
his home.

To understand the extraordinary nature of the US Justice Department’s
decision to prosecute Franklin, it should be recalled that in the
summer of 2004, at the same time that the Franklin case first became
public, Sandy Berger, who served as National Security Adviser to
former president Bill Clinton, was charged with removing highly
classified documents from the National Archives by hiding those
documents in his suit pockets, briefcase and socks. During his
investigation, Berger admitted to having destroyed some of those
documents, which related to the investigation of the September 11
attacks that was being conducted at that time by the 9/11 Commission.

In that event Berger was charged with the misdemeanor offense of
unauthorized removal and retention of classified material. A court
found him guilty and slapped a $50,000 fine on his wrist. Former CIA
Director John Deutsch was similarly charged with a misdemeanor
offense for having taken classified materials home with him after he
left the CIA. Deutsch was pardoned for the act by Clinton in the
final hours of his presidency.

IN FRANKLIN’S case, as in the cases of Weissman and Rosen, Justice
Department prosecutors decided to indict the men under clauses of the
Espionage Act – a law which has never previously been invoked. As
Harvard Law Professor Allan Dershowitz notes, it is not even clear if
the statute, so long ignored, actually remains law. In his words, “It
is a well-established norm in the US that when a law is not enforced
for many years, it ceases to be considered law.”

The decision to prosecute Franklin, Rosen and Weissman under the
articles of the Espionage Act, Dershowitz attests, “is the worst case
of selective prosecution I have seen in 42 years of legal practice.”
He argues: “If every administration official who did what Franklin
did – leak classified information to an ally for the purpose of
influencing domestic American policy – were prosecuted as he has
been, there would be more government officials in prison than at the
State Department, the Defense Department or the White House.”

Rosen and Weissman have been indicted for making unauthorized use of
classified information. Given that the two men had no security
clearances, did not work for the US government and had signed no oath
to protect classified government information from unauthorized use,
the decision to prosecute them places every journalist, think tank
scholar and lobbyist in Washington, DC – all of whom trade daily in
classified information as an accepted currency in the US capital – at
risk of similar prosecution.

FROM THE background included in the three men’s indictments, it is
clear that Franklin was an inadvertent victim in a larger FBI probe
of the senior AIPAC officials. Apparently, Franklin, who had tried to
draft the two men to assist him in convincing the Bush administration
to take the threat of the Iranian nuclear weapons program more
seriously, walked straight into an FBI dragnet. For reasons that
remain unknown, the FBI had been trailing Rosen, AIPAC’s senior
policy guru, for five years.

Once he was observed meeting with Rosen and Weissman, Franklin was
apparently compelled by the FBI to act as its agent in a sting
operation its agents orchestrated in order to prosecute Rosen and
Weissman. Franklin was wired and sent to meet with the two AIPAC
lobbyists armed with fabricated “classified” information relating to
an apparent imminent threat to the lives of Mossad agents operating
in Iraqi Kurdistan. At the behest of his FBI handlers, he urged the
two men to inform the Israeli embassy of the situation. That is,
although the men were subject to an ongoing FBI probe, the only
reason they were caught technically breaking the law is because the
FBI itself placed them in a situation where they felt that those
lives were at stake.

It is unclear why the FBI decided to go after AIPAC officials. As
Malcolm Hoenlein, the executive vice president of the Conference of
Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations stated last week, “that two
patriotic American citizens who are working for Jewish organizations,
who did nothing to violate American security, should have to stand
trial and be subject to the public scrutiny and public humiliation,
frankly I find very disturbing and a matter that we all have to look
at in a much more serious way.”

DISTRESSINGLY, rather than stand by its employees, AIPAC has led the
charge in publicly humiliating them. After firing them from the
organization last year, its spokesman announced: “AIPAC dismissed
Rosen and Weissman because they engaged in conduct that was not part
of their jobs and because this conduct did not comport in any way
with standards that AIPAC expects of its employees… AIPAC could not
condone or tolerate the conduct of the two employees under any
circumstances.”

Similarly, contrary to earlier pledges, AIPAC has ceased to pay the
legal fees of the two men’s defense, which are already running over a
million dollars. Recent reports indicate that AIPAC was negotiating
with the men’s lawyers regarding future payments. But those talks
failed due to AIPAC’s insistence that Rosen and Weissman commit
themselves not to file damage suits against the organization.

Even more disturbingly, as Sher noted in an open letter to AIPAC,
large excerpts of which were published in New York’s Jewish Week, in
an apparent attempt to distance itself from any actions that might
displease the FBI and the Bush administration, AIPAC has curtailed
its lobbying efforts on Israel’s behalf.

Sher notes that AIPAC has refused to involve itself in lobbying for
Congressional approval of the Saudi Arabia Accountability Act placed
before Congress last year.

If it were to become law, the act would compel the US government to
force Saudi Arabia to cease its active support for terrorism. Given
the Saudi government’s leading role in both indoctrinating Muslims to
the cause of jihad against the US and its leading role in financing
Hamas, there can be no doubt that supporting such a bill, which the
Bush administration opposes, should be AIPAC’s clear responsibility.
>From Sher’s perspective, AIPAC’s refusal to involve itself in
lobbying for the passage of the bill is evidence that “Having given
in on Rosen and Weissman, AIPAC has sent clear signals that it is
willing to preserve ‘access’ at the expense of influence.”

If AIPAC thought that by cutting Rosen and Weissman loose it would be
able to dissociate itself from them, it has already been proven
wrong. The Jerusalem Post reported this week that the FBI has renewed
its questioning of several Jewish leaders and former AIPAC officials
in the wake of the Franklin conviction.

IT IS unclear what motivated the FBI to pursue the AIPAC officials.
What is clear enough, however, is that effect of the prosecution has
not only weakened AIPAC but has made all American Jews who lobby the
US Congress and executive branch on behalf of Israel the objects of
suspicion and has empowered the anti-Semitic forces in the US
government who insist that all Jewish activists are somehow stained
with questionable patriotism.

If the American Jewish community wishes to mitigate the damage this
episode has already done to its good name and reputation, it must
unify behind Rosen and Weissman and insist that the charges against
them be dropped. And if AIPAC wishes to continue to be viewed as the
main American Jewish lobbying organization in the US capital, it
should be advised by its members and by its colleagues to lead the
charge.

————————–
This article can also be read at:

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1138622510376&pagename=JPost%2FJP

Article%2FShowFull