Saturday, September 3, 2005
I haven't commented much, if at all, on the case against two former AIPAC employees and a Pentagon analyst. Why? Because I just don't know enough about the case, and I don't think anyone does. I'm not going to sit here and pose, trying to establish my own "more American than thou" bona-fides by selling out a couple of what may be completely innocent people, nor am I going to start screaming about politically-motivated prosecutions, when I can't say I know that's true, either.
Anyway, here is a data point. The article calls into question the motivations for the prosecution in view of two factors: One, that there's an official in the Administration that was also involved in the events who has not been prosecuted, in fact, he's been promoted, and two, that the sort of horse-trading for low-level classified information that's alleged here goes on all the time in Washington. It's de rigeur.
JTA: New revelations in AIPAC case raise questions about FBI motives
The defendants and AIPAC supporters see the new revelations as evidence that federal prosecutors are targeting the powerful pro-Israel lobby for simply conducting the normal Washington practice of trading sensitive information. Officials inside and outside government privately acknowledge that classified information routinely changes hands among influential people in the foreign policy community and that the exchanges often are advantageous to diplomats.
“If, in fact, Satterfield passed on classified information that other people should not have had, then they should all be guilty of the same thing,” said Malcolm Hoenlein, the executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. “The fact that Satterfield hasn’t been prosecuted suggests that’s not the case.”...
