WASHINGTON, March 12, 2009
Ex-Intel Pick Lashes Out At "Israel Lobby"
Washington Post: Charles Freeman Stepped Down From Selection To Chair National Intelligence Council
-
Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair, above, chose Charles W. Freeman Jr. to chair the National Intelligence Council. Freeman stepped away on Tuesday, blaming "the Israel Lobby" for the controversy that surrounded him. (AP PHOTO)
-
Photo Essay Pursuing Peace In Israel, secretary of state Hillary Clinton vows U.S. will "vigorously" promote peace efforts.
-
Special Report First 100 Days Follow the Obama administration as it gets to work after the inauguration.
From Our Partner:
The withdrawal of a senior intelligence adviser after an online campaign to prevent him from taking office has ignited a debate over whether powerful pro-Israel lobbying interests are exercising outsize influence over who serves in the Obama administration.
When Charles W. Freeman Jr. stepped away Tuesday from an appointment to chair the National Intelligence Council -- which oversees the production of reports that represent the view of the nation's 16 intelligence agencies -- he decried in an e-mail "the barrage of libelous distortions of my record [that] would not cease upon my entry into office," and he was blunt about whom he considers responsible.
"The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East," Freeman wrote.
Referring to what he called "the Israel Lobby," he added: "The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views." One result of this, he said, is "the inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for US policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics."
Freeman's angry rhetoric notwithstanding, the controversy surrounding the former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia was broader than just Middle East politics. Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair's choice of Freeman prompted a storm of complaints about his recent commercial connections to China and questions about whether he was too forgiving of that nation's leaders.
But most of the online attention focused on Freeman's work for the Middle East Policy Council, a Washington-based nonprofit organization that is funded in part by Saudi money, and his past critical statements about Israel. The latter included a 2005 speech he gave to the National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations, where he referred to Israel's "high-handed and self-defeating policies" stemming from the "occupation and settlement of Arab lands," which he called "inherently violent."
Only a few Jewish organizations came out publicly against Freeman's appointment, but a handful of pro-Israeli bloggers and employees of other organizations worked behind the scenes to raise concerns with members of Congress, their staffs and the media.
For example, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), often described as the most influential pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington, "took no position on this matter and did not lobby the Hill on it," spokesman Josh Block said.
But Block responded to reporters' questions and provided critical material about Freeman, albeit always on background, meaning his comments could not be attributed to him, according to three journalists who spoke to him. Asked about this yesterday, Block replied: "As is the case with many, many issues every day, when there is general media interest in a subject, I often provide publicly available information to journalists on background."
Yesterday, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, which tried to derail Freeman's appointment, applauded his withdrawal. But it added: "We think Israel and any presumed 'lobby' had far less effect on the outcome than the common-sensical belief that the person who is the gatekeeper of intelligence information for the President of the United States should be unencumbered by payments from foreign governments."
There was plenty of debate about that within the blogosphere immediately after Freeman's withdrawal and the publication of his e-mail.
Quote
Jonathan Chait wrote irreverently on his New Republic blog, "The old spin was that Freeman's nomination, and the failure of his critics, shows how evil the Israel lobby is. . . . The new spin will be that Freeman's, ahem, resignation shows the Israel lobby is even more powerful and sinister than we thought."The old spin was that Freeman's nomination, and the failure of his critics, shows how evil the Israel lobby is. . . . The new spin will be that Freeman's, ahem, resignation shows the Israel lobby is even more powerful and sinister than we thought.
Jonathan Chait, New RepublicAnd Stephen Walt, one of two writers who in 2006 famously described the influence of the Israel lobby as dangerous, chimed in on ForeignPolicy.com: "For all of you out there who may have questioned whether there was a powerful 'Israel lobby,' or who admitted that it existed but didn't think it had much influence . . . think again." (Foreign Policy is owned by a subsidiary of The Washington Post Co.)
Time's Joe Klein opined that Freeman "was the victim of a mob, not a lobby. The mob was composed primarily of Jewish neoconservatives -- abetted by less than courageous public servants . . . [who have] made Washington even less hospitable for those who aren't afraid to speak their minds, for those who are reflexively contentious, who would defy the conventional wisdom."
The White House, which had sidestepped questions about Freeman twice in one week, said little yesterday. "I don't have anything to add from what Admiral Blair discussed yesterday in accepting Mr. Freeman's decision that his nomination not proceed and that he regretted it," press secretary Robert Gibbs said.
The White House did not respond last night to a question about outside influence on personnel decisions.
The earliest cry of alarm about Freeman's appointment -- a week before it was announced -- came from a former AIPAC lobbyist. Steve Rosen wrote Feb. 19 on his blog that Freeman was a "strident critic of Israel" and described the potential appointment as "a textbook case of the old-line Arabism" whose "views of the region are what you would expect in the Saudi foreign ministry."
Rosen said yesterday that he had been "quite positive" about President Obama's previous appointments for Middle East positions but that he was "surprised" about Freeman. The appointee's "most extreme point of view," he said, was not what he had expected for the head of the NIC.
Rosen has a unique position in Washington. A former chief foreign policy lobbyist for AIPAC, he and a colleague were indicted by the Bush administration in 2005 on suspicion of violating the Espionage Act, the first nongovernment employees ever so charged. AIPAC cut him loose, and a trial date has been set for May.
Meanwhile, Rosen is limited in what he can do. He said he cannot talk to AIPAC employees, nor can he lobby Congress. He has talked to "a number of journalists" who called him about Freeman, but not members of Congress. He did not answer when asked yesterday whether he has talked to Hill staff members.
Rosen's initial posting was the first of 17 he would write about Freeman over a 19-day period. Some of those added more original reporting, while some pointed to other blogs' finds about Freeman's record. In the process, Rosen traced increasing interest in the appointment elsewhere in the blogosphere, including coverage by Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic, Michael Goldfarb of the Weekly Standard, and Chait and Martin Peretz of the New Republic.
Interest also was growing among members of Congress.
On March 2, Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) wrote Blair to raise concerns based on what he had read about Freeman's positions. Two days later, he called for Blair to withdraw the appointment.
Also on March 2, the Zionist Organization of America called for support of a letter by Rep. Mark Steven Kirk (R-Ill.) that called on the DNI inspector general to investigate Freeman for possible conflicts of interest because of his financial relations with Saudi Arabia. That letter, signed by Kirk and seven other congressmen, including House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), was sent to Inspector General Edward Maguire on March 3.
Close observers of the events consider that request a turning point in the effort to stop Freeman's candidacy, and Rosen's blog began focusing almost exclusively on the appointment.
On Monday, the seven Republicans on the Senate intelligence committee wrote Blair to protest his choice, which was not subject to Senate confirmation, and threatened to review the NIC's work as long as Freeman chaired that body.
At a Senate Armed Services Committee meeting one day later, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) told Blair of his own concerns, and he added that the controversy "is not going to go away until you or Ambassador Freeman find a way to resolve it." Hours later, Freeman withdrew.
Freeman explained his decision last night on National Public Radio: "It became apparent that, no matter what the National Intelligence Council or the intelligence community might put out under my chairmanship, I would be used as an excuse -- if something was said that wasn't politically correct -- to disparage the quality and the credibility of the intelligence."
By Washington Post Staff Writer Walter Pincus
© 2009 The Washington Post. All rights reserved.
|
Michelle Obama tells how her role as the First Lady has changed her perspective.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 33 Comments- Usury banking- dirty oil money
- Pornography- they know how to have many women for one men
- Gambling- they have lots of money to spend
- Violence- to women, to children, to their own blood
- Incest- they wont stop at virgins and young girls
- Child abuse- goes without saying
- Family disintegration- how can you call it family when they have 30 wives and hundreds of children in their harem
- Adultery- how many wives????
- Mind wasting drugs- part of the cartel
- Greed- oil! no need to say more
- Atheism- well towards anybody without fanatic jihad in mind
- Crime- duh! suicide bombers ring a bell
They are using Hollywood, the news-media, television, and the Internet to spread their venom.
The end result is the disintegration of the family structure which is the main constituent of the society. Then this society will become easy to manipulate and control.
Americans must be made aware of this threat and work to reverse it.
Posted by moa-a
ABSOLUTELY!
People like Freeman who accepts money from the arabs to infiltrate in our politics and dare to lobby with a false front!!!
he would have exposed allot in front of congress and the Media...
Posted by iam4honesty at 1:27 PM : Mar 12, 2009
I prefer Romulans myself.
The republicans remind me of the "Ferengi".
LOL!!
This is EXACTLY what I've been saying for years!!!
The Israeli's are controlling ALL of our foreign policy decisions, even if it means killing ourselves, and harming America in the process!!!
It has been quite obvious for some time that Israel is not looking out for the best interests of the USA and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will have to address that.
This is not a problem that has Jewish religious ties, but instead has diplomatic ties to an obscure organization only known to few in the inner circles of the Israel.
Ever since the Reagan years of 1980, there have been Israeli spies who preyed on the USA and were caught accessing classified material. The NSA has not been open about disclosing the Israeli spy problem to the public, but it is a problem that continues. Other Israeli based problems are internet intrusions, cyber attacks, Internet broadcast storms, and international pornographic solicitations traced to Israeli sources.
I think the Vulcans are God's chosen people and I think you're a vulcan idiot.
[Posted by TheBiggestMistakeAmerica at 12:07 PM : Mar 12, 2009 ]
just like a neocon ... no ability to think for yourself ... just use what others have said!
To this atheist, it is not Israel, or the Jews, it is the corrupt leadership that use corruption and fear to make their own personal profits. Israel is no more responsible for the actions of its corrupt leadership than the US is for ours.
As for the economic debacle, it is the logical outcome of unregulated corruption, championed by the neocon capitalist leadership in the US. The fact that a disproportionate number of those involved just so happen to be Jewish is only because a disproportionate number have access to mega capital, witness the Madoff scandal, but I don't think Ken Lay or Jeff Skilling of Enron, for example, were Jewish, but their crimes were also "just another brick in the wall". .
For those of us who don't believe in myths and fairy tales, it is irrelevant.
If they are your "God's" chosen, then use your own money to support them, I will call to end suppoer that happens with my tax money.
[Posted by TheBiggestMistakeAmerica at 11:02 AM : Mar 12, 2009 ]
yea ... it would be a shame if we let any undo influence creep its way into the policy making process of the us.
how old are you going to be this year ... 12?
Posted by bobnjersey at 11:44 AM : Mar 12, 2009
Old enough to know this guy shouldn't be in that office with the conflict of interest he has...
How about you? Got out of fifth grade yet?
[Posted by TheBiggestMistakeAmerica at 11:02 AM : Mar 12, 2009 ]
yea ... it would be a shame if we let any undo influence creep its way into the policy making process of the us.
how old are you going to be this year ... 12?
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html
[Posted by zeitmin77 at 10:43 AM : Mar 12, 2009 ]
a dissenting opinion is a disgrace?
would eveyone thinking along the same lines be better?
if so ... what lines would you expect them to be thinking along?
As you know it?s all or nothing with Iran and the Middle East as a whole. According to most majority Gentile or atheistic Democrats, Israel and the Jews are 100% to blame for our current Middle East situation and 99% responsible for this global financial meltdown, end of story. I?m done trying to figure out why 75% of the Jewish constituency voted for Obama. He told you what he was going to do and now he?s doing it. You voted for Obama after Biden announced to Israel that she would need to accept a nuclear Iran? And he still got these votes? It?s really painful and pathetic. After 60 years on this Planet and as a 3rd generation ardent supporter of Israel, I am no longer as well as the rest of my family
Also to those listed above and to the Jewish community as a whole. You, my fragmented Jewish friends chose this or allowed it to be chosen for you. You have failed miserably to get in survival alignment in fact quite opposite. The one congruency I have found on this subject is it doesn?t matter for those of you who walk with the Arabs slamming Israel at every opportunity, slamming us infidels? in our support of Israel, penning columns regarding how bad Israel is with egregious charges against her by way of Israel?s defending herself against daily rocket launches from Gaza or even that most elementary event of changing ones name to sound a bit more Goiim.? I love Israel but now can?t stand the Jews? Is that possible? My opinion obviously doesn?t matter as you have already chosen it. These internal isometrics within the Jewish community and constituency are only understood if at all by you. We, the gentiles are merely outside looking in at this point and really don?t give a chit. Just know one thing. If I see congruency and seriousness in the Jews plight, you could not have a more deep-seated supporter. Alternatively and know this as well. Please do not humor yourselves in thinking Muslim?s or Democrats decipher sects or liberal Jewish viewpoints. This might come as a shock but outside of your own faith or sects of the faith, no one else separates these dynamics. You are Jews and are just as fragmented as any time in history. This unfortunately is going to get very interesting. It?s going to happen, just a matter of degree. Now, get it together or kindly get in line.
Awwwwwwwww, shame isn't it? The people get to speak out in ourtrage at the appointment of some sucker with a serious conflict of interest in the job he's about to take on. Awwwwwwwwwwwwww too bad! I know you're just crushed that you're not going to be able to represent your lobbyists against the Israeli people.
Our blind and unflinching support of Israel works directly against our own interests and security.
And, we all know that no one cares about the Chinese crap. Our whole nation is tied to China in one way or another.
Zionists are traitors to America and Obama is a disgrace for not using his popularity to take them on.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 33 Comments