A New York Times article about the FBI’s attempts to eavesdrop on the Israeli Embassy in Washington and the resulting leak of wiretapped conversations to a blogger (Scott Shane, “Leak Offers Look at Efforts by U.S. to Spy on Israel,” Sept. 5, 2011) was as much a defense of these actions as it was about the controversial eavesdropping and illegal leak.
That is because the article was based almost entirely on the comments of extremist, anti-Israel blogger Richard Silverstein justifying the actions of his friend, Shamai Leibowitz, who was sentenced to 20 months of incarceration for illegally transferring wiretapped documents to publicize on Silverstein's blog.
Unsurprisingly, the New York Times article failed to accurately inform readers of the radical anti-Israel agenda of the two. Instead, it identified Silverstein simply as a “blogger” who “gives a liberal perspective on Israel and Israeli American relations” and Leibowitz as “a lawyer with a history of political activism” who shares Silverstein’s “concern about repercussions from a possible Israeli airstrike on nuclear facilities in Iran.”
But was the main motive for the duo’s actions really “concern” for Israel and the U.S., as the article suggests? Given the players’ extensive background of denigrating Israel, and in some instances, working to undermine the nation's legitimacy, "concern" is a dubious characteriztion, to put it mildly. Regrettably, The Times' failure to identify the commentators accurately is characteristic of its often biased reporting.
Who is Shamai Leibowitz?
Shamai Leibowitz is not merely a politically liberal activist. Scion of the controversial philosopher Yeshayahu Leibowitz, a notorious critic of Israel who coined the term “Judeo-Nazi” to describe Israeli soldiers, Shamai has taken his grandfather’s condemnation to another level: He has promoted the dismantlement of the Jewish state, campaigning in the boycott, divestment and sanctions war against Israel.
An NGO-Monitor article by Attorney Avi Bell summarizes Shamai Leibowitz’s longtime activism against the Jewish state. Here are some examples:
- In 2003, Leibowitz wrote a paper entitled “Legal Strategies for a One State Framework” for the Association for One Democratic State in Palestine/Israel.
- The following year, he addressed a conference in Lausanne promoting a single, non-Jewish state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
- Leibowitz joined the Somerville Divestment Project, with the goal of bringing the boycott and divestment movement to American municipalities, and in November 2004, travelled to the small Massachusetts municipality, urging it to openly divest from the Jewish state and calling on residents to “demand that their tax dollars are not invested in companies that sell equipment and ammunition” to the Israeli Defense Forces. Despite his best efforts, the motion failed.
- In 2005, Leibowitz published an article in The Nation promoting economic sanctions against Israel, and a lawfare campaign against Israeli military and political leaders which would ban them from travelling and bring lawsuits against them in international courts. In addition, Leibowitz urged the U.S. administration to prohibit the sale of any military equipment to Israel. (An abridged version of Leibowitz’s article is available here.)
- Leibowitz attempted to boost the successful efforts of liberal Protestant churches in the United States to promote divestment from companies doing business with Israel by speaking at various functions and urging other churches to join these efforts. Although initially successful, similar anti-Israel resolutions were defeated at subsequent national church gatherings.
- In his professional capacity as a lawyer, Leibowitz defended terrorist leader Marwan Barghouti in court for the murders of 26 Israelis. The lawyer aroused the wrath of the victim’s relatives when he declared his client to be “a Palestinian Moses” and compared his case to the biblical prophet’s killing of an Egyptian to save his fellow Jew. During the trial, Barghouti’s defense lawyers attempted to turn the tables on the case by handing out their own indictment of Israel, accusing the state of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Certainly Leibowitz’s history of animosity and agitation against Israel is noteworthy in an article about his involvement in the FBI’s spying attempts on that country. But the only hint of Leibowitz’s controversial actions come near the end of the article, sharply downplayed:
He practiced law in Israel for several years, representing several controversial clients, including Marwan Barghouti, a Palestinian leader convicted of directing terrorist attacks on Israelis, who Mr. Leibowitz once said reminded him of Moses.
Isn't the real story here why the FBI would turn to a person with such a radical anti-Israel agenda to help with its spying efforts on Israel, and why they trusted him with such confidential information? Needless to say, the article does not explore these obvious and essential questions. On the contrary, the reporter turned to a blogger with the same biased agenda to shape the article.
Read The Rest →
Tweet