[Marxism] Two AIPAC agents walk in spy case; Palestinian activist still jailed awaiting trial

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The case against the figures from AIPAC, the foreign policy lobby strongly
supported to date by the rulers of both the United States and Israel, was
dropped after the judge ruled that prosecution had to prove that they had
knowingly damaged US national security in getting information for Israel. 

Taken by itself, this is a good decision. Applying this standard equitably
would eliminate most espionage cases, including those such as the Rosenberg
case. The whole charge that Alger Hiss spied for Russia completely dissolves
into nothing if the standard was applied, even if everything Chambers
accused him of is true.

However, targeted whistle-blowers and people facing espionage charges who
are not under the protection of the rulers can be sure that no such standard
will be applied if they are prosecuted, although prospective lawyers should
keep this case on file.

What happened here was not justice but pure favoritism. At issue was the
dispute over Israel policy that had spilled out of the halls of think tanks
and lobbies, and spilled into the courts. At issue is the
super-Most-Favored-Nation status that Israel has in the US political arena
and foreign policy, a status that a growing minority would like to modify.

Items like this are mostly worth watching for the ongoing political struggle
taking place. The outcome is a victory for the more strongly pro-Israel
forces like the Washington Post, and those (not at all anti-Israel, despite
the hype) who want the US to play a more active role in forcing a compromise
settlement with the Palestinians, thus relieving some of the pressures
stemming from US warmaking in the region.

Abourezk is, of course, entirely right to contrast the treatment of the two
AIPAC-ites and the brutality visited on el-Irian, whose only crime has been
to express views the US government would like to silence.

These are contrasting examples of one kind of justice: the class and racist
justice meted out by the US government.
Fred Feldman


May 4, 2009
http://www.counterpunch.org/abourezk05042009.html


Where's the Justice at the Justice Department? 
The AIPAC Spy Case 
By JAMES G. ABOUREZK 

The big news last week was the defection of Republican Senator Arlen Specter
to the Democrats; the bankruptcy filing of the Chrysler Corporation, and
finally, the retirement of Justice David Souter from the U.S. Supreme Court.

A much smaller news item competing with these sensational stories was that
the U.S. Justice Department announced that it is dropping the espionage
charges against two former AIPAC agents.  The story was so small that it
barely was a blip on the media's radar, bringing absolutely no comment on
the network news and talk shows.

That's known as clever public relations.  Announce the bad news on a day
when it won't be noticed.

Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman had been charged in 2005 with the crime of
espionage; specifically, handing over to Israel secret information they had
retrieved from Larry Franklin, who was then a policy analyst in the U.S.
Defense Department, working for Douglas Feith and for Paul Wolfowitz.

Franklin pleaded guilty to relaying top secret information on Iran to Rosen
and Weissman, and was sentenced to 12 years and 7 months in prison, a term
he is currently serving.

In the New York Times story detailing the Justice Department's decision to
drop the charges against Rosen and Weissman, the prosecutors claimed that
the presiding federal judge, T.S. Ellis III, had raised the bar for the
prosecution to prove its case against the two to a level they did not
believe they could meet.  The Judge said that the prosecutors could only
prevail if they could prove that Rosen and Weissman "knew that their
distribution of the information would harm U.S. National Security."  That
was enough to make them dismiss the charges.

No one in the headquarters of the Justice Department took part in the
announcement, but it was made by the prosecutors themselves, presumably the
U.S. Attorney in charge of prosecution.

I've had some experience in court with U.S. Attorneys.  What I know about
how they operate is that if they don't have a case, they will bring so many
charges that forces the unlucky Defendant to plead guilty to at least one or
two of them.

I would like to turn now the case of Sami Al-Arian, who was a college
professor in Florida.  Sami is a Palestinian, born in Kuwait.  And why
wasn't he born in Palestine like a good Palestinian should be?  Because,
most likely, his parents were chased out of Palestine when Israel undertook
its ethnic cleansing of that land in order to create an exclusive Jewish
state.

Al Arian was charged in 2003 in a 50 count indictment, essentially with a
plethora of terrorism charges. He waited 28 months in solitary in harsh
conditions, before being tried in 2005. The trial lasted six months, with
some 80 witnesses and 400 transcripts of intercepted phone conversations and
faxes.

At the end of the prosecution's case, Al Arian's lawyers rested without
offering any evidence or witnesses in his defense.  After 13 days of
deliberation, the jury acquitted Al Arian on 8 of 17 counts, and deadlocked
on the other with 10 to 2 favoring acquittal.  Two of the co-defendants
charged along with Al Arian were totally acquitted.

Undaunted, the Justice Department prosecutors  said they were considering
re-trying Al Arian on the deadlocked jury charges, one of which carried a
life sentence.

Rather than fighting on, Al Arian agreed to plead guilty to one count of
conspiracy to contribute services to or for the benefit of the Palestinian
Islamic Jihad (which is designated as a terrorist organization, but which
the FBI admitted during trial had never carried out an attack outside of
Israel.  The United States has designated a number of Palestinian liberation
groups as terrorists at the behest of Israel-groups that have never attacked
the United States). 

Al Arian had  spent years in solitary confinement awaiting his trial.  As
part of his plea agreement the prosecution agreed not to charge Al Arian
with any other crimes, and Al Arian agreed to expedited deportation.

He was, however, nearly re-charged when he refused to testify against
another Palestinian organization.  He went on a hunger strike, dangerous for
a diabetic, but finally the prosecutors agreed that the agreement exempted
him from testifying in other cases.Yet the charges have not been dropped and
the government wants to strip Al-Arian of all his defenses. The judge in the
case is considering a motion for dismissal based on the government's bait
and switch tactics. The government is opposing this motion 

One would have thought that, following the jury's decision, the bar set by
the jury in the Al Arian case would be so high that the prosecution would
finally leave him alone.  But there is apparently a difference between a
Palestinian patriot and Americans spying for Israel.  One group has a
powerful lobby in Washington, and the other has nothing, except the urging
of that powerful lobby to go after any Palestinian activist with criminal
charges or anything else they can get their hands on.

The question is:  Can you find the justice in the Justice Department?

James G. Abourezk is a lawyer practicing in South Dakota. He is a former
United States senator and the author of two books, Advise and Dissent, and a
co-author of Through Different Eyes. This article also  runs in the current
issue of Washington Report For Middle East Affairs.  Abourezk  can be
reached at georgepatton45@xxxxxxxxxx



________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu