Thursday, April 20, 2006

Sabotaging the AIPAC case

Undernews raises the interesting point that the recent attempt by the FBI to pre-censor Jack Anderson’s files on the ridiculous excuse that there may be something in those files related to the AIPAC case may well be another attempt by Zionists in the Bush Administration to sabotage the prosecution of the AIPAC case.  This sounds like a bit of a stretch, until you consider that the prosecutors, with the connivance of the judge and the – ahem – New York Times, appears to have set up the prosecution to allow the AIPAC defendants to characterize the matter as a free speech issue (the original Undernews link is here, but doesn’t seem to work; see also here and here).  The AIPACers weren’t journalists, and allegedly passed on classified information which they knew to be classified regarding an enemy of the United States, information which could have resulted in the loss of lives of American government employees, to an Israeli intelligence agent.  If that is protected free speech, the only case in which the United States could prosecute an espionage case is where the spy had signed some kind of loyalty oath (that would probably catch such cases as Ames and Pollard, but their lawyers might want to revisit the issue).  Every other case of espionage would be protected free speech.  The United States would be the only country in the world unable to do anything about most cases of spying.

I’m looking forward to this.  Can you imagine what the high-tech people will say when they realize that the spies working for China mailing the plans of American military technology to their handlers in Beijing will now be able to claim they were simply exercising their First Amendment rights?  The American public seems to be having trouble grasping the significance of the AIPAC case – the fact that Israel is not an ally of the United States, and can more accurately be described as a parasite – but the fact that the AIPAC case led directly to the United States losing the ability to protect itself against espionage may start to wake them up.  Do you think that the American government giving up the ability to stop spying in order to protect the most obvious organ of the Israel Lobby might prove something about the validity of the Lobby thesis?