Yesh Gvul
Courage To Refuse
Free The Five
New Profile
Refuser Solidarity Network

Name: Antony Loewenstein
Home: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Comment Rules
About Me:
See my complete profile

Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions
Sweat-Shop Productions



Previous Posts

Powered by Blogger


Monday, January 23, 2006

Agents of influence

Days after former Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin was sentenced to jail for sharing classified information with Zionist lobbyists, American Jewish leaders are concerned about the fall-out:

"Anti-Defamation League director Abe Foxman said the Franklin affair could potentially pose a threat to all Jewish lobbyists.

"Foxman said it is not clear what exactly is allowed in terms of the relationships between the administration and the media and between nongovernmental organizations and foreign governments. The lack of clarity, he said, could have a destructive influence on the activities of all U.S. Jewish groups."

Some other Jewish leaders are even more outraged:

"Malcolm Hoenlein [executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations] labelled the ruling 'disturbing,' a comment greeted by applause from the audience to whom he spoke about US-Israel relations at the Interdisciplinary Center's Herzliya Conference.

"'The very fact that this kind of climate can exist in the capital of the United States is unacceptable,' Hoenlein said of the sentencing as well as subtle anti-Semitism heard in the corridors of power.

"He added, '[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.'

Once again, alleging anti-Semitism in an attempt to deflect legitimate questions and criticisms shows the desperation of the Zionist lobby. It also proves that greater public awareness of the largely secret relationship between the US and Israel is feared by the same individuals.

Gorillia in the Room explained in May 2005 the various issues raised by the Franklin case. The American public are largely ignorant of the individuals and allegiances behind the Iraq war and current rumblings over Iran. Gorilla revealed what was at stake:

"I know that these questions lead in directions where the media generally doesn't go - did we really invade Iraq at least in part as a result of the influence of the Israel lobby? Are we being pushed into a confrontation with Iran the same way? That's the real question raised by this case. [Zionist lobbyists] AIPAC and its defenders are going to try to spin this investigation as motivated by anti-Semitism. I would urge you not to buy into that without carefully evaluating such charges yourself. They've been caught receiving classified information illegally so that they could lobby for war with Iran, and now they're trying to change the subject."

Meanwhile in Australia, such questions are ignored.


Blogger Wombat said...

It's laughable that the same corridors of power that donate more money to Israel than any other country, are being accused of anti-Semitism.

No mention is made of wrongdoing, or aknowledgment of even mistakes being made. Especialy seeing as Israel has been caught before with it;s hand in the cookie jar.


Monday, January 23, 2006 11:50:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Israel didn't do anything. Franklin, an American did. And the information he provided was not designed to damage the US. And it was not made for monitary reward. And he thought the information provided would save lives.

Do you have a problem with saving Jewish lives?

The Jewish lobbies in America are obsessed with saving lives, just as Arab lobbies in arabia appear to be obsessed with killing people.

Monday, January 23, 2006 12:17:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...


How do you knwo so much about this the information that was passed on? You yourself admitted Frankllin proabably did what he did becasue he was offered a career opportunity.

Please provide a link that proves th ainformation passed on was saving Israeli lives. And then prove that the US were not prepare to do anything to ensure those Israeli lives would be saved.

Your last remark was typical of the biggotry you have come to personify Ibraham.

Monday, January 23, 2006 12:36:00 pm  
Blogger Progressive Atheist said...

If you believe the Jews are God's chosen people, then a Jewish life is worth more than an Arab life. By the rate of killing in Israel-Palestine, it appears that one Jewish life is worth three Arab lives.

Monday, January 23, 2006 12:42:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

So much addamo, so little time to denounce it. Lucky that it is so easy to do.

I, of course, said no such thing as "You yourself admitted Frankllin proabably did what he did becasue he was offered a career opportunity." It is a damnable lie for anyone to even imply it was what i wrote. Mostly bulladdamo.

The information that was passed, which Franklin got "caught" had to do with saving lives.

While I can not say this is a good source, it does cover this particular story part.
The FBI's probe of AIPAC "appears
to have intensified only after the FBI monitored a call between Franklin and reporters at CBS News in May 2004, in which he allegedly disclosed information about aggressive Iranian policy in Iraq."
"In the conversation with CBS, Franklin's remarks reportedly revealed sensitive intelligence intercepts, potentially compromising sources and methods of intelligence gathering, according to some sources aware of the call."
After this call, "the FBI's counterintelligence division, headed by David Szady, who also supervised the alleged campaign against Ciralsky, confronted Franklin, according to sources familiar with the case. Threatened with charges of espionage and decades of imprisonment, Franklin was deployed to set up a sting against AIPAC, the sources say."
"Under FBI pressure, Franklin agreed to feed AIPAC's Rosen and Weissman bogus
information about plans to kidnap Israelis in Kurdistan, the sources say. AIPAC officials reportedly passed that information to the Israeli Embassy in an attempt to save lives, sources say."

Monday, January 23, 2006 1:02:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...


You are a liar. On the last thead on this subject, you stated that Franklin was doign thbis in return for a promotion. Go back and check, but it's tehre in B&W.

If the informtion Franklin was passing on was so harmless then there would be no justificsatino for a 13 year sentene. But why bother you with the facts?

Monday, January 23, 2006 2:09:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

_01, you read it. In fact, cut and paste it. Until then, stop trying to spread bulladdamo and call it truth.

Whether it was harmless or not is not a part of the sentencing procedure. Did he violate the law? Was is the penalty? How harsh must it be to get him to cooperate, even to the point of telling lies? Kind of like torture, wouldn't you say?

Monday, January 23, 2006 2:53:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

Saturday, January 21, 2006 2:53:19 PM

Ibrahamav said...

"It was merely a case of an American doing a favor for a friendly nation while hoping to advance his career."

There you go you liar.

"Whether it was harmless or not is not a part of the sentencing procedure."

The senetcen was based on the passing of classigfied information. Information is classified for a good reason - too keep it out of enemy hands. So yes, it was far from harmelss by th every defnition.

"Did he violate the law?"


"Was is the penalty?"

Up to 26 years but he got 13. I'm guessing he probably negotiated a limited sentence by agreeing to testify against the APIAC lobbyists.

"How harsh must it be to get him to cooperate, even to the point of telling lies? Kind of like torture, wouldn't you say?"

Yeah well seeing as it's back in Vogue in the US, anything is possible. Funy though how if they did torure him, why they gave him a suspended senetence.

Telling lies? Anyting is possible, but the FBI has hundreds of hours of tapes, hard frive informsation and woretaps to enter into a courtroom.

Any conspiracy theory is better than admitting the obvious, especially for a now proven liar.

Monday, January 23, 2006 3:06:00 pm  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Monday, January 23, 2006 4:20:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

progressive atheist

This is a very interesting statement. Can I see your statistics and your source? Or, shall I assume you are spouting propaganda?

By the rate of killing in Israel-Palestine, it appears that one Jewish life is worth three Arab lives.

Monday, January 23, 2006 5:36:00 pm  
Blogger neoleftychick said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Monday, January 23, 2006 6:03:00 pm  
Blogger Progressive Atheist said...

Almost 1900 Palestinians have been killed since the start of the “al-Aqsa Intifada”, compared to almost 700 Israelis.

Around 1450 Palestinians have been killed since the start of the "al-Aqsa Intifada", compared to more than 525 Israelis.

So, the figure of 3:1 is correct, according to the above sites.


In the first study period The Times reported Israeli deaths at a rate 2.8 times higher than Palestinian deaths, and in 2004 this rate increased by almost 30%, to 3.6, widening still further the disparity in coverage. The Times’ coverage of children’s deaths was even more skewed. In the first year of the current uprising, Israeli children’s deaths were reported at 6.8 times the rate of Palestinian children’s deaths. In 2004 this differential also increased, with deaths of Israeli children covered at a rate 7.3 times greater than the deaths of Palestinian children. Given that in 2004 22 times more Palestinian children were killed than Israeli children, this category holds particular importance. We could find no basis on which to justify this inequality in coverage.

I can account for this disparity. The Times is a Zionist rag!

If we go by child deaths, it would be fairer to say that one Jewish child's life = 22 Palestinian children's lives.

Killing anyone is wrong, but these statistics overwhelming prove the wickedness of the Israeli pigs (Violet's term).

Now, call me an anti-Semite!

Monday, January 23, 2006 6:23:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

progressive atheist

but these statistics overwhelming prove the wickedness of the Israeli pigs

the first web site you provided a link for, is not reputable and the second does not work. And you dismiss a site like The Times? Enough said.

Regardless, I too can insert links to sites that disprove the figures you supplied. But, honestly I can't see the point when you refer to my relatives as Israeli pigs

You have no interest in listening to alternative viewpoints. Have you ever lived in Israel -- to call Israeli people names like that? I don't know what you are, but you are not a person worth debating.

Monday, January 23, 2006 8:05:00 pm  
Blogger Progressive Atheist said...


You used the term "Arab pigs". I was merely responding in kind. If you take offence at the term "Israeli pigs", you should consider the offence that you do to others by use of the term "Arab pigs".

Remember the adage: Do to others as you would have them do to you. (Jesus, Hillel, and many others)

Monday, January 23, 2006 10:44:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

progressive atheist

When have I referred to Arabs as pigs?

Please copy and paste this. Otherwise apologise.

Monday, January 23, 2006 11:15:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

progressive atheist

In fact, I am calling you a liar. Your claim is untrue and you know it.

Monday, January 23, 2006 11:31:00 pm  
Blogger Progressive Atheist said...

It was in one of the deleted comments.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 12:23:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

I'm sure it is in one of the deleted comments where eddie admitted to being an antisemite and AL admitted that he hated jews.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 12:50:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

Spoken like a proven liar.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 1:54:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Indeed you and progressive have been tagged as proven liars.

Learn to live with it.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 3:34:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Former Pentagon analyst sentenced in spying case

By Matthew Barakat ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, AP

Frustrated with what he saw as government inaction against the threat posed by Iran, Pentagon analyst Lawrence A. Franklin decided to take national security into his own hands.
He leaked classified information to reporters, an Israeli diplomat and two members of a pro-Israel lobbying group, hoping the National Security Council would take notice.

He certainly got the government's attention. Franklin was sentenced Friday to more than 12 years in prison, even though the judge who sentenced him believed his intentions were good.

"The defendant did not seek to hurt the United States," U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III said at Franklin's sentencing for illegally disclosing classified information. "He thought he was helping to bring certain information to the attention" of the security council. Worries about Iran have risen significantly since 2002-2004, when Franklin said he discussed classified information with the diplomat and two former lobbyists from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Franklin, 59, a policy analyst whose expertise included Iran, pleaded guilty to three felony counts in October as part of a plea bargain that requires him to cooperate in the government's prosecution against the former lobbyists, who are scheduled for trial in April.

Franklin's prison time could be sharply reduced later if prosecutors are satisfied with the extent of his cooperation. Ellis allowed Franklin to remain free while the case continues.

Franklin did not speak at Friday's sentencing, but said at his plea hearing in October that he was motivated by frustration with U.S. policy in the Middle East when he gave classified information to Israeli diplomat Naor Gilon and the AIPAC lobbyists, Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman.

Franklin admitted that he met periodically with Rosen and Weissman and discussed classified information, including information about potential attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq.

Franklin said he believed that Rosen and Weissman's contacts on the security council could help advance a tougher stance against Iran. He also said his conversations with Gilon resulted in a net gain of intelligence for the United States.

"He gave me far more information than I gave him," Franklin said at the time. Ellis said Friday that he accepts Franklin's account and as a result, he views Franklin's case differently than he would someone who leaked to the Soviets at the height of the Cold War.

The 12-year, 7-month sentence imposed by Ellis was on the low end of federal sentencing guidelines. Prosecutors had said a sentence within the guidelines was appropriate.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 5:28:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

So this article proves that Franklin was a puppet and that the big fish are teh AIPAC lobbyists and Gilon.

Should make for an interesting trial.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 6:29:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

Actually, it proves nothing other than Franklin sought to change minds by giving Israelis information that was in no way damaging to the US.

It does make one believe that there was some residual antisemitism behind the FBI's actions.

It also show's AL's agenda.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 7:20:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

It most ertainyl proves that 2 AIPAC lobbyists got caught red handed as well as an Israeli ambassador.

Youre suggestion of anti-Semtism is misplaced. Is a policemen who apprehends a jewish thief anti-Semitic for cathing him? Of course not.

Very bad form.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 8:15:00 am  
Blogger violet said...

progressive atheist

You are one big fat liar. I have not delted a comment and I have never had a comment deleted. I have never used the term "Arab pigs" and you know it.

You meanwhile call my relatives "Israeli pigs". You are vile and you are a liar who cannot even be honest about your own behaviour.

You need to produce the evidence for your outrageous and untrue claim or apologise for being dishonest.

And don't get out of this by telling yet more lies

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 8:59:00 am  
Blogger Wombat said...

progressive atheist,

I tend to disagree with Violet onmost issues, but it wod be out fo character for her to make thsi remark. Are you sure it was Violet who made this remark or could you have confused her with Neolefty, who most certanly is capable?

Neo has had a qute a fwe of her posts deleted by the administrator for obvious reasons.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 9:22:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 1:46:00 pm  
Blogger Progressive Atheist said...


I have only been on this forum for a short while and I'm not familiar with Violet's or Neolefty's modus operandi, so I will have to go by what you say about whether such comments are out of character for Violet or not. To the best of my memory it was Violet who made these remarks about "Arab pigs".

One way to resolve this dispute would be for the blog administrator to restore the offending comments. This will show who made them. Another way would be for Neolefty to come forward and to confirm or deny whether it was she who made the remark.

In the meantime, I will take the opportunity to apologize to Violet for making her take offence, even though I think her reaction was a little overblown.

I would also ask Violet to apologize for calling me a liar.

I will also say that I will be watching her and others like her for their offensive language, and I will be vigilant in calling them to account for their discriminatory language towards Arabs.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 3:52:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...

As will all of us Progressive Atheist,

You learn to develop a thick skin on this forum and discriminate between bain farts and outright offensive language. AL is being proactive in this capacity and I think it's for the better. If someone is unable to convey a mesage without abusing others, they have no place here.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 4:06:00 pm  
Blogger Antony Loewenstein said...

"If someone is unable to convey a mesage without abusing others, they have no place here."

Indeed. Robust debate is healthy and encouraged. Outright abuse is not. Some people clearly are unable to tell the difference.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 5:30:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 5:54:00 pm  
Blogger violet said...

The fact is progressive atheist, I know I did not use that phrase because it is not something I would ever say. I object to the Arab culture, not to individual Arabs. I believe Islamic culture treats women appallingly and I will always have strong things to say about this. I do not wish to destroy Islam, but I believe (as many Muslim feminists do) that it desperately needs a reformation.

However, I have never called people names or used bad language to express my perspective. It isn't a way I speak, either online or off.

You, on the other hand, did. You not only misrepresented me but you called my Israeli relatives "pigs". Despite this, I accept your apology, But, as far as things stand, I do not believe I have anything to apologise for. Why don't you go back through the posts and find the one you took offence to. You'll find it was not mine. The onus is on you to prove your statement not on anyone else to disprove it.

The terribly sad thing about this is that you (and I don't know you) probably (I'm guessing) advocate the achievement peace in Israel by creating two states, or by combining two cultures into one state. This blog, after all, exists as a venue for debating different concepts to achieve peace in that country.

Now, how praytell, do you expect that to ever happen when you refer to half the cultural population as "pigs". Do you think peace can be achieved by namecalling? There is a difference between debate, heated discussion and outright offensive language. I suggest you find it, because your comments offended me deeply.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 6:09:00 pm  
Blogger Progressive Atheist said...

If you read my original remarks, you will realize

a) I was responding to someone using the term "Arab pigs", and

b) I was not directing the remarks at you.

As I have told you, the comment containing the remark "Arab pigs" has been deleted. So there is no need to tell me to prove where I got it. If you persist in doing so, I will simply ignore you.

If immoderate language offends you, you should be criticizing Ibrahamav and other posters. I suggest you cannot because of your partisan politics (in support of the apartheid state).

I do not expect you to apologize to me for calling me a liar, for I realize now that you do not have sufficient moral courage.

I agree with you that Islam requires reformation, and I would add that Zionism does also.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 11:51:00 pm  
Blogger Wombat said...


Progressive Atheist does have a point about the blinkers you and Melanie have abotu Ibrham's abuse. While you and Melanie remain within the bouds of decency, he clerly does no and yet you object to far more tame posts.

Just a thought.

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 2:49:00 am  
Blogger Ibrahamav said...

As Israel is not an apartheid state, there is no one supporting such. But those who support Jordan and Saudi Arabia are supporting apartheid states.

Girls I'm sorry that the word addamo offends you so much, I will try to tone it down.

Progressive - add anything you'd like. You have posted so many falsehoods nobody's reading it anymore.

Friday, January 27, 2006 8:33:00 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home