3 aug 2015
It is illuminating to contrast Israel’s belated solidarity with Pollard to its determined hostility to Mordechai Vanunu.
No more confusing mind games are played by sovereign states than in the context of ‘espionage,’ ‘treason,’ and the work of the professional spy. All important governments seek secret knowledge of what other governments and their leaders are doing and planning, and it matters little whether these governments are allies or adversaries, especially with respect to espionage. Espionage is the unseemly twin of secrecy, and national security is becoming ever more dependent on a country keeping its own secrets while learning those of others. In the amoral world of global espionage there are shockingly surprising cooperative liaisons, and bargains worked out behind closest doors even with the direst of enemies. Treason (and patriotism) are closely related to the ethos of espionage, and exhibit the politically correct subservience of individual conscience to the security policies of the state.
Edward Snowden’s massive disclosures were confusing in this respect as he disclosed secrets about what amounted to acts of de facto espionage carried out by the government against American citizens, as well as others. In effect, the surveillance apparatus of the U.S. Government was abolishing the distinction between ‘self’ and ‘other’ or ‘friend’ and ‘enemy’ in world politics. For some, this made Snowden a traitor guilty of treason because he disclosed to the world some premium national security secrets of his own government. For others, Snowden was a hero as he acted benevolently, sacrificing his personal wellbeing, career, and safety to warn the publics of the world, but above all the American public, that the government was abusing its powers in fundamental ways, threatening to privacy and the very fabric of democracy. Snowden acted from the belief that expectations of trust and privacy should be the first principle of a functioning constitutional democracy as the United States purports to be. This does not mean that security claims can never be given precedence, but that their scope should be constrained by strong evidence justifying specific actions, and that meta-data consisting of indiscriminate and totalizing forms of surveillance are fundamental threats to republican commitments to constrain government in state/society relations.
The latest example of this confusing and contradictory optic that pertains to the work of a spy is illustrated by the controversy swirling around the scheduled release on November 20th of Jonathan Pollard who has been in prison since being convicted of espionage on behalf of Israel 30 years ago. As with Snowden, there are many liberals, and even some on the left, in the intelligence community, and among anti-Israelis who view the decision to release Pollard as setting a horrible precedent. The argument being made is that if Pollard had not been a Jewish-American ardent Zionist with ties to Israel he would have been sentenced to death as a traitor, and such a punishment would be deserved given the secrets he passed to Israel. Others point out that Pollard had become a bargaining chip in relations between Israel and the United States, and that his release was an expression of cynical geopolitics, a way of softening the anger in Tel Aviv associated with the Iran Nuclear Agreement that is viewed by Israel, both its leaders and most of its public as a dangerously imprudent initiative.
James North and Philip Weiss question the release from the treason angle. They contend that Pollard’s release is dubious because he provided Israel with information during the Cold War that allegedly was then likely traded to the Soviet Union (reportedly in exchange for allowing Jews to emigrate) that might have disclosed information to Moscow that exposed American agents to death or capture.[“MSM avoids central Pollard question: Did Israel trade secrets with Soviets for emigres?” Mondoweiss, July 30, 2015] For this reason, the crimes of Pollard cannot be excused or mitigated as acts of conscience to protect Israel from threats associated with undisclosed activities in hostile Arab neighbors, and his parole is rendered as problematic. It is never made clear in this line of reasoning whether Pollard was privy to such secondary uses made of his work as a spy in the pay of Israel, and whether that should make any difference in assessing the case for parole. Parole should be granted or withheld based on the behavior of a convicted person during his time in prison and the degree to which his release might produce further harm to society.
There is a question underlying this debate about the relationship between conscience and national identity. Is obedience to the laws of the state of residence and nationality the highest claim on behavior? I believe that a principled and reasonable disregard for national law could morally and politically justify acts of espionage of the sort that Pollard was alleged to have committed, including a genuine dedication to the promotion of the opportunity for Soviet Jews to emigrate to Israel. Apparently, conscience was not the main motivator for Pollard, and for this reason alone, he does pose a threat to society more serious than being one among thousands of rogue espionage entrepreneurs that pass secrets back and forth around the world as a matter of profession or for the sake of adventure and material gain. As such, whether Pollard is released or not is more a matter of public empathy than a question of whether or not his crime was such as to make his release either overdue or unacceptable.
Those who endorse Pollard’s release most enthusiastically are mainly drawn from the ranks of those who identify unconditionally with Israel, contending that he has already suffered too much, considering that he was acting on the basis of his Zionist conscience to provide Israel with highly classified intelligence information that it was supposedly, in any event entitled to receive from the U.S. Government according to a memorandum of understanding between the two governments. Beyond this, the claim being made by supporters is that Pollard has served already a disproportionately long prison sentence considering that his acts of espionage were on behalf of a government that was a friend and ally of the United States, and besides, that he has serious health issues that make his release justifiable on humanitarian grounds alone, especially given his age and harmlessness.
Whatever knowledge Pollard may have had about U.S. secrets is 30 years old, and presumably worthless, making it purely vindictive to continue his imprisonment or impose strong conditions on his release. For Israel, Pollard became over the years a high profile symbolic hero (second only to the captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit) whose release was avidly sought on a priority basis by a string of prominent leaders including Yitzhak Shamir, Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, and Benjamin Netanyahu. It seems that the Israeli government wanted to show the depth of its commitment to someone whose liberty was lost because he acted to uphold Israeli security interests.
As a matter of public relations, Pollard’s release is being portrayed as an act of good will by the U.S. Government and as a routine exercise of discretion by parole authorities in a context where no convincing rationale exists for extending Pollard’s time in jail. Such a stance is opposed by some former top-ranked security officials, including Donald Rumsfeld, who contend that Pollard still has information that could damage U.S. security interests. In this regard, such right-wing critics of Pollard’s release claim that he possesses ‘a photographic memory,’ and thus continues to pose a threat to American security interests, surely vindictiveness disguised as paranoid patriotism.
Behind this argument about espionage, treason, loyalty, and parole is the strange person of Jonathan Pollard whose life as a master spy remains an enigma of multiple dimensions. Pollard would be a good model for an inverted 20th century version of Dostoyeski’s ‘underground man,’ living a lavish life style by reliance on dark and devious undertakings. It seems a no-brainer that Pollard should never have been hired as an intelligence analyst. His application for employment had been rejected by the CIA, apparently because of the numerous instabilities uncovered in his private life. Yet he was later inexplicably hired by U.S. Naval Intelligence despite the organization having reliable information that Pollard was a drug-using loose cannon whose multiple lies distorting his past were detected by a polygraph test. Although the facts are contested, it is well established that Pollard was a Zionist true believer drawn to the Israeli experience since his childhood.
As a young adult he became a mercenary and mercurial spy in Israel’s pay. He actively sought, in collaboration with his first wife, to sell secret information to South Africa and even Pakistan as well as to Israel, partly to deal with private financial troubles that included heavy indebtedness. His behavior while serving as a U.S. Government employee seemed altogether bizarre, including his undisguised and careless seizure for private use of large quantities of highly classified materials outside his area of responsibility. He even had trouble convincing Israel, at first, that he could be trusted to provide useful information without detection, but after finally succeeding in gaining Tel Aviv’s confidence, was paid significant sums during his rather short career as a spy.
Nevertheless, in 1985 when Pollard was on the verge of being apprehended in the United States on spying allegations, he sought refuge in Israel’s Embassy in Washington. Israel embassy guards turned Pollard away, evidently not wanting Israel to be tarnished by their association with him. After leaving the embassy he was immediately arrested by U.S. enforcement officers waiting on the periphery. In keeping with this posture, Israel at first denied any involvement with Pollard, then in 1987 issued an apology to the U.S. Government for receiving information from Pollard. Israel only conceded the professional espionage relationship with Pollard in 1998. Perhaps, this earlier failure to protect someone on their payroll as a spy, explains Israel’s later full court press to gain Pollard’s release.
In my view, releasing Pollard is the proper course of action, not because of Israeli pressures, but despite them. President Obama tried to portray the release as a law enforcement issue, nothing more, nothing less. Because of the suspicious timing given the tensions associated with the Iran diplomacy and the resulting inflamed domestic political context, this effort to downplay the release did not gain traction. Pollard served long enough for the crimes that he committed, poses no credible threat to the security of any country, and behaved well as a prisoner. To deny parole for another 15 years would be unconscionable given these conditions, or even to condition its grant on forcing Pollard to remain in the United States appears vindicative.
In my view, espionage has long been one way clever people make a living, assuming the risks of detection and hypocrisies associated with criminalization of the activity. It is certainly within the prerogatives of the sovereign state to criminalize the improper use of the knowledge acquired in the course of public employment in an espionage capacity. What Pollard did was surely a breach of contract and trust that breaks national criminal law. Yet espionage may be morally and politically justified (and may be even imperative) in exceptional circumstances where truth-telling and whistle blowing serves as a safety valve against abusive forms of state secrecy and a variety of political dangers posed by government policies.
In this regard, it is illuminating to contrast Israel’s belated solidarity with Pollard to its determined hostility to Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli employee at the Dimona nuclear facility who confirmed for the world that Israel had secretly developed nuclear weapons. Vanunu was made by Israel to pay a high price for his public service (compounded by his conversion to Christianity), spending 18 years in prison (11 in solitary confinement), and then upon release being put under a series of punitive constraints that have included several instance of brief reimprisonment for violating conditions of his release. In my view, Vanunu belongs on the same honor roll as Edward Snowden and Daniel Ellsberg who revealed state secrets that served the cause of national wellbeing and were also of benefit to humanity as a whole. Ellsberg has called Vanunu “the preeminent hero of the nuclear era.”
Pollard does not belong in this company. He seems more like an unstable and rogue opportunist than a self-sacrificing idealist even if his behavior is evaluated from an Israeli Zionist perspective. Perhaps, Pollard will partially redeem himself, and his legacy, by writing an honest memoir that unravels his mixed motives, tangled pre-prison life, and search for redemption. He seems to harbor no resentment against Israel for their refusal to give him sanctuary within their embassy back in 1985. On the contrary, while in prison he married an Israeli woman associated with the far right, seeks to be repatriated to Israel where he was awarded citizenship, and has expressed gratitude for those in the Israeli government who struggled for his release. Given Pollard’s past, it would not be surprising if he tells his story wrapped in an Israeli flag.
Those who criticize Pollard’s release on patriotic grounds, contending that his information helped an enemy (Soviet Union) or hurt the United States, are prioritizing loyalty to the state over competing considerations that could motivate such behavior. The ethos of treason as a high crime is the apotheosis of statist absolutism, overriding the exposure of the most extreme state crimes, for example, disclosing plans of a contemplated war of aggression initiated by a first strike with nuclear weapons. Calling Snowden or Vanunu ‘traitors’ is a perversion of moral principle, condemning those whose public acts deserve praise and protection given their nature. Not all disclosures of state secrets should be treated as expressions of civic virtue. Disclosures that violate the law to be justifiable must be deemed as sincere acts of public conscience that appear reasonable based on surrounding circumstances.
Loyalty to the state continues to be the north star of conventional patriotism. For the citizen pilgrim solidarity with an emergent eco-humanist insurgency is the keystone of 21st century political community and ethical responsibility deserving precedence when in conflict with nationalist and tribal affinities.
This article originally appeared here.
No more confusing mind games are played by sovereign states than in the context of ‘espionage,’ ‘treason,’ and the work of the professional spy. All important governments seek secret knowledge of what other governments and their leaders are doing and planning, and it matters little whether these governments are allies or adversaries, especially with respect to espionage. Espionage is the unseemly twin of secrecy, and national security is becoming ever more dependent on a country keeping its own secrets while learning those of others. In the amoral world of global espionage there are shockingly surprising cooperative liaisons, and bargains worked out behind closest doors even with the direst of enemies. Treason (and patriotism) are closely related to the ethos of espionage, and exhibit the politically correct subservience of individual conscience to the security policies of the state.
Edward Snowden’s massive disclosures were confusing in this respect as he disclosed secrets about what amounted to acts of de facto espionage carried out by the government against American citizens, as well as others. In effect, the surveillance apparatus of the U.S. Government was abolishing the distinction between ‘self’ and ‘other’ or ‘friend’ and ‘enemy’ in world politics. For some, this made Snowden a traitor guilty of treason because he disclosed to the world some premium national security secrets of his own government. For others, Snowden was a hero as he acted benevolently, sacrificing his personal wellbeing, career, and safety to warn the publics of the world, but above all the American public, that the government was abusing its powers in fundamental ways, threatening to privacy and the very fabric of democracy. Snowden acted from the belief that expectations of trust and privacy should be the first principle of a functioning constitutional democracy as the United States purports to be. This does not mean that security claims can never be given precedence, but that their scope should be constrained by strong evidence justifying specific actions, and that meta-data consisting of indiscriminate and totalizing forms of surveillance are fundamental threats to republican commitments to constrain government in state/society relations.
The latest example of this confusing and contradictory optic that pertains to the work of a spy is illustrated by the controversy swirling around the scheduled release on November 20th of Jonathan Pollard who has been in prison since being convicted of espionage on behalf of Israel 30 years ago. As with Snowden, there are many liberals, and even some on the left, in the intelligence community, and among anti-Israelis who view the decision to release Pollard as setting a horrible precedent. The argument being made is that if Pollard had not been a Jewish-American ardent Zionist with ties to Israel he would have been sentenced to death as a traitor, and such a punishment would be deserved given the secrets he passed to Israel. Others point out that Pollard had become a bargaining chip in relations between Israel and the United States, and that his release was an expression of cynical geopolitics, a way of softening the anger in Tel Aviv associated with the Iran Nuclear Agreement that is viewed by Israel, both its leaders and most of its public as a dangerously imprudent initiative.
James North and Philip Weiss question the release from the treason angle. They contend that Pollard’s release is dubious because he provided Israel with information during the Cold War that allegedly was then likely traded to the Soviet Union (reportedly in exchange for allowing Jews to emigrate) that might have disclosed information to Moscow that exposed American agents to death or capture.[“MSM avoids central Pollard question: Did Israel trade secrets with Soviets for emigres?” Mondoweiss, July 30, 2015] For this reason, the crimes of Pollard cannot be excused or mitigated as acts of conscience to protect Israel from threats associated with undisclosed activities in hostile Arab neighbors, and his parole is rendered as problematic. It is never made clear in this line of reasoning whether Pollard was privy to such secondary uses made of his work as a spy in the pay of Israel, and whether that should make any difference in assessing the case for parole. Parole should be granted or withheld based on the behavior of a convicted person during his time in prison and the degree to which his release might produce further harm to society.
There is a question underlying this debate about the relationship between conscience and national identity. Is obedience to the laws of the state of residence and nationality the highest claim on behavior? I believe that a principled and reasonable disregard for national law could morally and politically justify acts of espionage of the sort that Pollard was alleged to have committed, including a genuine dedication to the promotion of the opportunity for Soviet Jews to emigrate to Israel. Apparently, conscience was not the main motivator for Pollard, and for this reason alone, he does pose a threat to society more serious than being one among thousands of rogue espionage entrepreneurs that pass secrets back and forth around the world as a matter of profession or for the sake of adventure and material gain. As such, whether Pollard is released or not is more a matter of public empathy than a question of whether or not his crime was such as to make his release either overdue or unacceptable.
Those who endorse Pollard’s release most enthusiastically are mainly drawn from the ranks of those who identify unconditionally with Israel, contending that he has already suffered too much, considering that he was acting on the basis of his Zionist conscience to provide Israel with highly classified intelligence information that it was supposedly, in any event entitled to receive from the U.S. Government according to a memorandum of understanding between the two governments. Beyond this, the claim being made by supporters is that Pollard has served already a disproportionately long prison sentence considering that his acts of espionage were on behalf of a government that was a friend and ally of the United States, and besides, that he has serious health issues that make his release justifiable on humanitarian grounds alone, especially given his age and harmlessness.
Whatever knowledge Pollard may have had about U.S. secrets is 30 years old, and presumably worthless, making it purely vindictive to continue his imprisonment or impose strong conditions on his release. For Israel, Pollard became over the years a high profile symbolic hero (second only to the captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit) whose release was avidly sought on a priority basis by a string of prominent leaders including Yitzhak Shamir, Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, and Benjamin Netanyahu. It seems that the Israeli government wanted to show the depth of its commitment to someone whose liberty was lost because he acted to uphold Israeli security interests.
As a matter of public relations, Pollard’s release is being portrayed as an act of good will by the U.S. Government and as a routine exercise of discretion by parole authorities in a context where no convincing rationale exists for extending Pollard’s time in jail. Such a stance is opposed by some former top-ranked security officials, including Donald Rumsfeld, who contend that Pollard still has information that could damage U.S. security interests. In this regard, such right-wing critics of Pollard’s release claim that he possesses ‘a photographic memory,’ and thus continues to pose a threat to American security interests, surely vindictiveness disguised as paranoid patriotism.
Behind this argument about espionage, treason, loyalty, and parole is the strange person of Jonathan Pollard whose life as a master spy remains an enigma of multiple dimensions. Pollard would be a good model for an inverted 20th century version of Dostoyeski’s ‘underground man,’ living a lavish life style by reliance on dark and devious undertakings. It seems a no-brainer that Pollard should never have been hired as an intelligence analyst. His application for employment had been rejected by the CIA, apparently because of the numerous instabilities uncovered in his private life. Yet he was later inexplicably hired by U.S. Naval Intelligence despite the organization having reliable information that Pollard was a drug-using loose cannon whose multiple lies distorting his past were detected by a polygraph test. Although the facts are contested, it is well established that Pollard was a Zionist true believer drawn to the Israeli experience since his childhood.
As a young adult he became a mercenary and mercurial spy in Israel’s pay. He actively sought, in collaboration with his first wife, to sell secret information to South Africa and even Pakistan as well as to Israel, partly to deal with private financial troubles that included heavy indebtedness. His behavior while serving as a U.S. Government employee seemed altogether bizarre, including his undisguised and careless seizure for private use of large quantities of highly classified materials outside his area of responsibility. He even had trouble convincing Israel, at first, that he could be trusted to provide useful information without detection, but after finally succeeding in gaining Tel Aviv’s confidence, was paid significant sums during his rather short career as a spy.
Nevertheless, in 1985 when Pollard was on the verge of being apprehended in the United States on spying allegations, he sought refuge in Israel’s Embassy in Washington. Israel embassy guards turned Pollard away, evidently not wanting Israel to be tarnished by their association with him. After leaving the embassy he was immediately arrested by U.S. enforcement officers waiting on the periphery. In keeping with this posture, Israel at first denied any involvement with Pollard, then in 1987 issued an apology to the U.S. Government for receiving information from Pollard. Israel only conceded the professional espionage relationship with Pollard in 1998. Perhaps, this earlier failure to protect someone on their payroll as a spy, explains Israel’s later full court press to gain Pollard’s release.
In my view, releasing Pollard is the proper course of action, not because of Israeli pressures, but despite them. President Obama tried to portray the release as a law enforcement issue, nothing more, nothing less. Because of the suspicious timing given the tensions associated with the Iran diplomacy and the resulting inflamed domestic political context, this effort to downplay the release did not gain traction. Pollard served long enough for the crimes that he committed, poses no credible threat to the security of any country, and behaved well as a prisoner. To deny parole for another 15 years would be unconscionable given these conditions, or even to condition its grant on forcing Pollard to remain in the United States appears vindicative.
In my view, espionage has long been one way clever people make a living, assuming the risks of detection and hypocrisies associated with criminalization of the activity. It is certainly within the prerogatives of the sovereign state to criminalize the improper use of the knowledge acquired in the course of public employment in an espionage capacity. What Pollard did was surely a breach of contract and trust that breaks national criminal law. Yet espionage may be morally and politically justified (and may be even imperative) in exceptional circumstances where truth-telling and whistle blowing serves as a safety valve against abusive forms of state secrecy and a variety of political dangers posed by government policies.
In this regard, it is illuminating to contrast Israel’s belated solidarity with Pollard to its determined hostility to Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli employee at the Dimona nuclear facility who confirmed for the world that Israel had secretly developed nuclear weapons. Vanunu was made by Israel to pay a high price for his public service (compounded by his conversion to Christianity), spending 18 years in prison (11 in solitary confinement), and then upon release being put under a series of punitive constraints that have included several instance of brief reimprisonment for violating conditions of his release. In my view, Vanunu belongs on the same honor roll as Edward Snowden and Daniel Ellsberg who revealed state secrets that served the cause of national wellbeing and were also of benefit to humanity as a whole. Ellsberg has called Vanunu “the preeminent hero of the nuclear era.”
Pollard does not belong in this company. He seems more like an unstable and rogue opportunist than a self-sacrificing idealist even if his behavior is evaluated from an Israeli Zionist perspective. Perhaps, Pollard will partially redeem himself, and his legacy, by writing an honest memoir that unravels his mixed motives, tangled pre-prison life, and search for redemption. He seems to harbor no resentment against Israel for their refusal to give him sanctuary within their embassy back in 1985. On the contrary, while in prison he married an Israeli woman associated with the far right, seeks to be repatriated to Israel where he was awarded citizenship, and has expressed gratitude for those in the Israeli government who struggled for his release. Given Pollard’s past, it would not be surprising if he tells his story wrapped in an Israeli flag.
Those who criticize Pollard’s release on patriotic grounds, contending that his information helped an enemy (Soviet Union) or hurt the United States, are prioritizing loyalty to the state over competing considerations that could motivate such behavior. The ethos of treason as a high crime is the apotheosis of statist absolutism, overriding the exposure of the most extreme state crimes, for example, disclosing plans of a contemplated war of aggression initiated by a first strike with nuclear weapons. Calling Snowden or Vanunu ‘traitors’ is a perversion of moral principle, condemning those whose public acts deserve praise and protection given their nature. Not all disclosures of state secrets should be treated as expressions of civic virtue. Disclosures that violate the law to be justifiable must be deemed as sincere acts of public conscience that appear reasonable based on surrounding circumstances.
Loyalty to the state continues to be the north star of conventional patriotism. For the citizen pilgrim solidarity with an emergent eco-humanist insurgency is the keystone of 21st century political community and ethical responsibility deserving precedence when in conflict with nationalist and tribal affinities.
This article originally appeared here.
29 july 2015
An Israeli youth holds a picture of Jonathan Pollard, during a demonstration for his release in Jerusalem on July 13, 2010.
Jonathan Pollard, a former US Navy analyst convicted of spying for Israel, will be released on parole November 21, after serving 30 years in prison, his lawyers said Tuesday.
"The decision to grant parole was made unanimously by the three members of the (US) Parole Commission, who make their decisions independently of any other US government agency," the lawyers said in a statement. "The decision is not connected to recent developments in the Middle East."
According to AFP, the statement comes amid allegations that Pollard's release is tied to attempts by the US to make reparations to Israel following the recent nuclear deal with Iran.
Israel vehemently opposed the deal that was sealed earlier this month under which Iran promised major world powers to dismantle or mothball much of its nuclear industry in return for an easing and eventual lifting of international sanctions against the Islamic republic.
Israeli lawmaker Nahman Shai, chairman of parliament's lobby for Jonathan Pollard, said on Sunday that he believed a decision to release Pollard could be linked to the storm over Iran.
"I wouldn't rule it out," he said.
"The Americans are looking for ways to placate Israel, there's no doubt about that," Shai, of the opposition Zionist Union party, told public radio.
"They are aware of the anger and bitterness in Israel, both in political circles and among the general public. "Pollard in their eyes is a kind of candy which could sweeten somewhat the bitterness over the Iran agreement."
A US-born Israeli, Pollard was arrested in 1985 and two years later was sentenced to life in prison for passing American intelligence on Arab and Pakistani weapons to Israel.
Pollard becomes eligible for parole in November, and the US Justice Department indicated on Thursday that it would not oppose his release.
"The Department of Justice has always and continues to maintain that Jonathan Pollard should serve his full sentence for the serious crimes he committed, which in this case is a 30-year sentence as mandated by statute," its spokesman Marc Raimondi said.
Jonathan Pollard, a former US Navy analyst convicted of spying for Israel, will be released on parole November 21, after serving 30 years in prison, his lawyers said Tuesday.
"The decision to grant parole was made unanimously by the three members of the (US) Parole Commission, who make their decisions independently of any other US government agency," the lawyers said in a statement. "The decision is not connected to recent developments in the Middle East."
According to AFP, the statement comes amid allegations that Pollard's release is tied to attempts by the US to make reparations to Israel following the recent nuclear deal with Iran.
Israel vehemently opposed the deal that was sealed earlier this month under which Iran promised major world powers to dismantle or mothball much of its nuclear industry in return for an easing and eventual lifting of international sanctions against the Islamic republic.
Israeli lawmaker Nahman Shai, chairman of parliament's lobby for Jonathan Pollard, said on Sunday that he believed a decision to release Pollard could be linked to the storm over Iran.
"I wouldn't rule it out," he said.
"The Americans are looking for ways to placate Israel, there's no doubt about that," Shai, of the opposition Zionist Union party, told public radio.
"They are aware of the anger and bitterness in Israel, both in political circles and among the general public. "Pollard in their eyes is a kind of candy which could sweeten somewhat the bitterness over the Iran agreement."
A US-born Israeli, Pollard was arrested in 1985 and two years later was sentenced to life in prison for passing American intelligence on Arab and Pakistani weapons to Israel.
Pollard becomes eligible for parole in November, and the US Justice Department indicated on Thursday that it would not oppose his release.
"The Department of Justice has always and continues to maintain that Jonathan Pollard should serve his full sentence for the serious crimes he committed, which in this case is a 30-year sentence as mandated by statute," its spokesman Marc Raimondi said.
25 july 2015
After 30 years in American prison, Wall Street Journal report suggests that Pollard's release is imminent in an attempt to calm rocky US-Israel relations.
The administration of US President Barack Obama is currently preparing to release Jonathan Pollard, an Israeli convicted of spying on the United States, according to a report Friday night in the Wall Street Journal. However, another official subsequently denied the report.
The report cited US officials who said they hoped that Pollard's release would help smooth US-Israeli relations, which have been rocky since six world powers recently signed a deal with Iran to limit its nuclear program in return for sanctions relief.
Some US officials are pushing for Pollard's release in a matter of weeks, while others expect it could take months, possibly until his parole consideration date in November, the Journal reported.
A US official said she was not aware that he would be released before he is eligible for parole in November.
Pollard has been in American prison for 30 years after being accused of spying for Israel on the Jewish nation's ally.
Recent reports in the Jewish-American publication Algemeiner also cited sources who claimed that Pollard's release was imminent upon the completion of his 30-year sentence in November.
The administration of US President Barack Obama is currently preparing to release Jonathan Pollard, an Israeli convicted of spying on the United States, according to a report Friday night in the Wall Street Journal. However, another official subsequently denied the report.
The report cited US officials who said they hoped that Pollard's release would help smooth US-Israeli relations, which have been rocky since six world powers recently signed a deal with Iran to limit its nuclear program in return for sanctions relief.
Some US officials are pushing for Pollard's release in a matter of weeks, while others expect it could take months, possibly until his parole consideration date in November, the Journal reported.
A US official said she was not aware that he would be released before he is eligible for parole in November.
Pollard has been in American prison for 30 years after being accused of spying for Israel on the Jewish nation's ally.
Recent reports in the Jewish-American publication Algemeiner also cited sources who claimed that Pollard's release was imminent upon the completion of his 30-year sentence in November.
22 july 2015
A leading Republican senator said Tuesday that he was confident Congress would reject a deal regarding Iran's nuclear program that was signed last week with world powers.
Sen. John McCain said the unknown part of the process was whether there would be enough votes in the chamber to override President Barack Obama's expected veto.
It is obvious that the 54 Republicans in the 100-member Senate will reject the deal, McCain said. The real question, he believes, is whether 13 Democrat senators will side with Republicans in order to cancel Obama's veto power.
Stressing that Iran would at some point acquire nuclear weapons, the forceful critic of the Obama administration's Syria policy said he was "deeply concerned about the ultimate result of this [the deal]."
"I predict now that it will be the nuclearisation of the Middle East."
McCain, who delivered his remarks while speaking at the Washington-based Hudson Institute think tank, also expressed concerns that Iran continues to "control Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen in the region", saying it was a "paradox" for the U.S. to support the Iran deal for safety in the region while leaving Iran to continue to sway influence in those countries.
"It seems to me that we are making a historic mistake," he said, echoing the words of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been also very critical of the deal.
In the case of "reputed violations" of the deal by Iran, the next U.S. president would be faced with a very difficult sense of circumstances, McCain said.
The crucial 60-day review period for lawmakers began Monday.
The United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution Monday endorsing the deal that placed long-term curbs on Iran's nuclear program.
President Barack Obama said the approval of the deal by Council would help his push to gain congressional support.
Obama, who said he welcomed a "robust" debate about the agreement, has threatened to veto any legislation that undermines the accord. He needs the support of 34 of the 100 senators to maintain his veto and protect the deal.
Congress requires a two-thirds majority vote in the House and Senate to override a presidential veto.
Sen. John McCain said the unknown part of the process was whether there would be enough votes in the chamber to override President Barack Obama's expected veto.
It is obvious that the 54 Republicans in the 100-member Senate will reject the deal, McCain said. The real question, he believes, is whether 13 Democrat senators will side with Republicans in order to cancel Obama's veto power.
Stressing that Iran would at some point acquire nuclear weapons, the forceful critic of the Obama administration's Syria policy said he was "deeply concerned about the ultimate result of this [the deal]."
"I predict now that it will be the nuclearisation of the Middle East."
McCain, who delivered his remarks while speaking at the Washington-based Hudson Institute think tank, also expressed concerns that Iran continues to "control Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen in the region", saying it was a "paradox" for the U.S. to support the Iran deal for safety in the region while leaving Iran to continue to sway influence in those countries.
"It seems to me that we are making a historic mistake," he said, echoing the words of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been also very critical of the deal.
In the case of "reputed violations" of the deal by Iran, the next U.S. president would be faced with a very difficult sense of circumstances, McCain said.
The crucial 60-day review period for lawmakers began Monday.
The United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution Monday endorsing the deal that placed long-term curbs on Iran's nuclear program.
President Barack Obama said the approval of the deal by Council would help his push to gain congressional support.
Obama, who said he welcomed a "robust" debate about the agreement, has threatened to veto any legislation that undermines the accord. He needs the support of 34 of the 100 senators to maintain his veto and protect the deal.
Congress requires a two-thirds majority vote in the House and Senate to override a presidential veto.
American Treasury Department targets senior military commanders, Lebanese businessman involved in Hezbollah's fighting in Syria.
The US Treasury Department on Tuesday imposed sanctions on three leaders of the militant group Hezbollah and a businessman in Lebanon, saying they were key players in the group's military operations in Syria.
"The United States will continue to aggressively target (Hezbollah) for its terrorist activities worldwide as well as its ongoing support to (Syrian President Bashar) Assad's ruthless military campaign in Syria," said Adam Szubin, the Treasury Department's acting under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence.
US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have said they are troubled by support from Iran for regional proxy groups such as Hezbollah. The United States and world powers struck a deal with Iran last week to limit the country's nuclear program in return for relief from sanctions. Obama said last week that the deal would make it easier for the United States to "check Iran's nefarious activities." The Treasury said it had taken action in June against Hezbollah front companies.
Hezbollah has long been designated a terrorist organization by the United States, but Tuesday's action was directed at three senior military officials - Mustafa Badr Al Din, Ibrahim Aqil, and Fu'ad Shukr - for their role in coordinating or participating in the group's support for Assad's government in Syria's ongoing civil war.
A businessman in Lebanon, Abd Al Nur Shalan, was also sanctioned for procuring weapons for Hezbollah and shipping them to Syria, the Treasury Department said.
The US Treasury Department on Tuesday imposed sanctions on three leaders of the militant group Hezbollah and a businessman in Lebanon, saying they were key players in the group's military operations in Syria.
"The United States will continue to aggressively target (Hezbollah) for its terrorist activities worldwide as well as its ongoing support to (Syrian President Bashar) Assad's ruthless military campaign in Syria," said Adam Szubin, the Treasury Department's acting under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence.
US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have said they are troubled by support from Iran for regional proxy groups such as Hezbollah. The United States and world powers struck a deal with Iran last week to limit the country's nuclear program in return for relief from sanctions. Obama said last week that the deal would make it easier for the United States to "check Iran's nefarious activities." The Treasury said it had taken action in June against Hezbollah front companies.
Hezbollah has long been designated a terrorist organization by the United States, but Tuesday's action was directed at three senior military officials - Mustafa Badr Al Din, Ibrahim Aqil, and Fu'ad Shukr - for their role in coordinating or participating in the group's support for Assad's government in Syria's ongoing civil war.
A businessman in Lebanon, Abd Al Nur Shalan, was also sanctioned for procuring weapons for Hezbollah and shipping them to Syria, the Treasury Department said.
20 july 2015
LIVE: Ash Carter meets with Defense Minister Ya'alon upon arrival in Israel, says visit meant to emphasize US has no limits on ability to increase Israel's security.
US Defense Secretary Ash Carter was warmly welcomed by his Israeli counterpart Monday on the first Cabinet-level US visit to the Jewish state since the Iran nuclear deal was announced.
The Pentagon chief met at Israel's defense headquarters with Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon and on Tuesday is to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has strongly criticized the Iran deal.
In a joint press conference held by the two defense chiefs, Carter said the US would do all it could to help Israel defend itself including continued funding for missile defense, joint training, and advanced equipment like the F-35, which Israel will receive before all other international partners next year.
Ya'alon said Israel "greatly disagrees" with the agreement reached with Iran on its nuclear program. But, he said, "The scope and depth of the relationship between the defense establishments of the United States and Israel is unprecedented – between the Pentagon and the Ministry of Defense, between our armed forces, intelligence corps and defense industries."
The Israeli defense forces held a standard welcoming ceremony for Carter upon his arrival in Israel. He then went into a closed meeting with Ya'alon. On his flight to Tel Aviv, Carter said he has no expectation of persuading Israeli leaders to drop their opposition to the Iran nuclear deal. But he said he'll emphasize that the accord imposes no limits on what Washington can do to ensure the security of Israel and US Arab allies.
Netanyahu has argued that the deal clears the way for Iran to build nuclear weapons that would threaten Israel's existence and ultimately diminish US and global security. Even as tensions between the US and Israel have grown over how to contain Iran's nuclear program has grown, the US-Israel defense relationship has deepened in recent years.
The US has invested hundreds of millions in an Israeli air defense system known as Iron Dome, designed to shoot down short-range rockets, mortars and artillery shells fired into northern Israel from southern Lebanon and into Israel's south from the Gaza Strip. The US has worked with Israel on anti-missile systems and a wide range of other defenses.
Two years ago the Pentagon committed to providing advanced radars for Israel's fleet of fighter jets and KC-135 refueling aircraft, and making Israel the first country to buy the V-22 Osprey hybrid airplane-helicopter.
US Defense Secretary Ash Carter was warmly welcomed by his Israeli counterpart Monday on the first Cabinet-level US visit to the Jewish state since the Iran nuclear deal was announced.
The Pentagon chief met at Israel's defense headquarters with Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon and on Tuesday is to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has strongly criticized the Iran deal.
In a joint press conference held by the two defense chiefs, Carter said the US would do all it could to help Israel defend itself including continued funding for missile defense, joint training, and advanced equipment like the F-35, which Israel will receive before all other international partners next year.
Ya'alon said Israel "greatly disagrees" with the agreement reached with Iran on its nuclear program. But, he said, "The scope and depth of the relationship between the defense establishments of the United States and Israel is unprecedented – between the Pentagon and the Ministry of Defense, between our armed forces, intelligence corps and defense industries."
The Israeli defense forces held a standard welcoming ceremony for Carter upon his arrival in Israel. He then went into a closed meeting with Ya'alon. On his flight to Tel Aviv, Carter said he has no expectation of persuading Israeli leaders to drop their opposition to the Iran nuclear deal. But he said he'll emphasize that the accord imposes no limits on what Washington can do to ensure the security of Israel and US Arab allies.
Netanyahu has argued that the deal clears the way for Iran to build nuclear weapons that would threaten Israel's existence and ultimately diminish US and global security. Even as tensions between the US and Israel have grown over how to contain Iran's nuclear program has grown, the US-Israel defense relationship has deepened in recent years.
The US has invested hundreds of millions in an Israeli air defense system known as Iron Dome, designed to shoot down short-range rockets, mortars and artillery shells fired into northern Israel from southern Lebanon and into Israel's south from the Gaza Strip. The US has worked with Israel on anti-missile systems and a wide range of other defenses.
Two years ago the Pentagon committed to providing advanced radars for Israel's fleet of fighter jets and KC-135 refueling aircraft, and making Israel the first country to buy the V-22 Osprey hybrid airplane-helicopter.
19 july 2015
US Secretary of Defense Ash Carter
US Defense Secretary Carter headed to Jerusalem for talks on ways the US can further improve Israel's security, but US officials say new weaponry won't be offered as compensation for the Iran deal.
In the face of Israeli outrage over the Iran nuclear accord, the US Secretary of Defense was scheduled to visit Israel on Sunday to reinforce arguably the strongest part of the US-Israeli relationship: Military cooperation.
Israel has expressed concern that US sales of advanced weaponry to Gulf Arab states has the potential of offsetting, to some degree, Israel's qualitative military edge. But officials say Washington has no plans to offer new weaponry as compensation for the Iran deal.
Aides said in advance of the trip that although Carter strongly supports the Iran deal, he had no intention of trying to reverse Israeli opposition to it. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has denounced the deal as a mistake of historic proportion.
Carter is scheduled to meet with Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon, as well as with IDF generals, and visit troops in northern Israel. He also planned to stop in Jordan and Saudi Arabia, US allies, whose leaders also are worried about implications of the nuclear deal.
On the day the Iran accord was announced, Carter issued a statement saying the US is "prepared and postured" to help Israel improve its security, although he offered no specifics. He added that the US would "use the military option if necessary" to protect its allies, to "check Iranian malign influence" and to ensure freedom of navigation in the Gulf.
The US-Israel defense relationship has deepened in recent years, even as tensions between the two over how to contain Iran's nuclear program has grown.
The US has invested hundreds of millions in the Iron Dome air defense system, which is designed to shoot down short-range rockets, mortars and artillery shells fired from southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.
Just two months ago Washington announced a $1.9 billion arms sale to Israel for a range of missiles and bombs, including bunker busters that can penetrate reinforced defenses to reach underground targets. Not included is the Pentagon's biggest bunker buster bomb.
Israeli officials insist they are not prepared to discuss American "compensation" for the Iran deal, saying that would imply acceptance of the accord.
"Everybody talks about compensating Israel," Netanyahu said Sunday. "I guess the question you have to ask yourself is, if this deal is supposed to make Israel and our Arab neighbors safer, why should we be compensated with anything," he told ABC's "This Week."
"How can you compensate a country, my country, against a terrorist regime that is sworn to our destruction and is going to get a path to nuclear bombs and billions of dollars to boot for its terror activities," he said.
The US and Israel have been holding talks on renewing a 10-year defense pact set to expire in 2018. Under the current deal, Israel receives about $3 billion in military aid from the US each year. That number is likely to increase when the deal is renewed, and possibly before then.
Obama has indicated he is open to new ways of improving Israeli security, but he has played down the idea that ending economic penalties on Iran will drastically alter the balance of power in the region.
"Do we think that with the sanctions coming down, that Iran will have some additional resources for its military and for some of the activities in the region that are a threat to us and a threat to our allies? I think that is likelihood," Obama told a White House news conference on Wednesday. "Do I think it's a game-changer for them? No."
Obama's principal military adviser, Gen. Martin Dempsey, met with Netanyahu and Israeli military officials just last month. The Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman told reporters with him in Israel that once an Iran nuclear deal was struck, Israeli and US officials needed to "quickly and comprehensively" discuss the way ahead.
"It will be incumbent on both of us to make sure that we provide the kind of reassurances that the state of Israel has always counted on us to provide. But we are going to have to do the same thing with the Gulf allies," Dempsey said, alluding to deep concerns in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states that removing sanctions on Iran would make it a greater regional danger.
Dempsey said he understands why Israelis believe a nuclear deal will give Iran room to accelerate its funding of surrogate Shiite groups like Hezbollah.
"I share their concern," Dempsey said.
US Defense Secretary Carter headed to Jerusalem for talks on ways the US can further improve Israel's security, but US officials say new weaponry won't be offered as compensation for the Iran deal.
In the face of Israeli outrage over the Iran nuclear accord, the US Secretary of Defense was scheduled to visit Israel on Sunday to reinforce arguably the strongest part of the US-Israeli relationship: Military cooperation.
Israel has expressed concern that US sales of advanced weaponry to Gulf Arab states has the potential of offsetting, to some degree, Israel's qualitative military edge. But officials say Washington has no plans to offer new weaponry as compensation for the Iran deal.
Aides said in advance of the trip that although Carter strongly supports the Iran deal, he had no intention of trying to reverse Israeli opposition to it. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has denounced the deal as a mistake of historic proportion.
Carter is scheduled to meet with Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon, as well as with IDF generals, and visit troops in northern Israel. He also planned to stop in Jordan and Saudi Arabia, US allies, whose leaders also are worried about implications of the nuclear deal.
On the day the Iran accord was announced, Carter issued a statement saying the US is "prepared and postured" to help Israel improve its security, although he offered no specifics. He added that the US would "use the military option if necessary" to protect its allies, to "check Iranian malign influence" and to ensure freedom of navigation in the Gulf.
The US-Israel defense relationship has deepened in recent years, even as tensions between the two over how to contain Iran's nuclear program has grown.
The US has invested hundreds of millions in the Iron Dome air defense system, which is designed to shoot down short-range rockets, mortars and artillery shells fired from southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.
Just two months ago Washington announced a $1.9 billion arms sale to Israel for a range of missiles and bombs, including bunker busters that can penetrate reinforced defenses to reach underground targets. Not included is the Pentagon's biggest bunker buster bomb.
Israeli officials insist they are not prepared to discuss American "compensation" for the Iran deal, saying that would imply acceptance of the accord.
"Everybody talks about compensating Israel," Netanyahu said Sunday. "I guess the question you have to ask yourself is, if this deal is supposed to make Israel and our Arab neighbors safer, why should we be compensated with anything," he told ABC's "This Week."
"How can you compensate a country, my country, against a terrorist regime that is sworn to our destruction and is going to get a path to nuclear bombs and billions of dollars to boot for its terror activities," he said.
The US and Israel have been holding talks on renewing a 10-year defense pact set to expire in 2018. Under the current deal, Israel receives about $3 billion in military aid from the US each year. That number is likely to increase when the deal is renewed, and possibly before then.
Obama has indicated he is open to new ways of improving Israeli security, but he has played down the idea that ending economic penalties on Iran will drastically alter the balance of power in the region.
"Do we think that with the sanctions coming down, that Iran will have some additional resources for its military and for some of the activities in the region that are a threat to us and a threat to our allies? I think that is likelihood," Obama told a White House news conference on Wednesday. "Do I think it's a game-changer for them? No."
Obama's principal military adviser, Gen. Martin Dempsey, met with Netanyahu and Israeli military officials just last month. The Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman told reporters with him in Israel that once an Iran nuclear deal was struck, Israeli and US officials needed to "quickly and comprehensively" discuss the way ahead.
"It will be incumbent on both of us to make sure that we provide the kind of reassurances that the state of Israel has always counted on us to provide. But we are going to have to do the same thing with the Gulf allies," Dempsey said, alluding to deep concerns in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states that removing sanctions on Iran would make it a greater regional danger.
Dempsey said he understands why Israelis believe a nuclear deal will give Iran room to accelerate its funding of surrogate Shiite groups like Hezbollah.
"I share their concern," Dempsey said.
15 july 2015
FBI investigation spanning 20 countries ends in extensive arrests operation of members of malware forum Darkode; one Israeli suspected of aiding terror groups.
Lahav 433's cyber unit arrested on Tuesday three Israelis involved in the world's largest-known English-language malware forum, an online marketplace called Darkode, where cybercriminals bought and sold hacked databases, malicious software and other products that could cripple or steal information from computer systems.
More than 70 cybercriminals in 20 countries are targets of the FBI investigation. Some have been charged, while others were the subject of search warrants because some countries require evidence to be seized before criminal charges can be filed, investigators said. The three Israelis are suspected of launching attacks against websites, taking over webstores, stealing credit card details and other offenses. In return for their criminal services, the suspects were paid with Bitcoin.
Two of the arrested are brothers suspected of selling credit card information. The third is suspected of aiding a terror organization transfer funds, and a gag order has been placed on the details of the case. The Rishon LeZion Magistrate's Court extended their remand until Sunday.
On the forum, which started operating at the end of 2007, hackers sold malware or solicited others to install it on unsuspecting victims' computers, investigators said. Marketplace members also bought and sold stolen databases, some containing millions of people's email addresses or personal information, often used in identity-theft and computer fraud schemes. The site, which had roughly 250 to 300 active members, was seized and shut down by American authorities on Tuesday.
Those arrested or searched live in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Israel, Latvia, Macedonia, Nigeria, Romania, Serbia and Sweden. There are victims in all of those countries, and others, authorities said.
Hackers couldn't just log onto the site. They had to be vouched for or nominated by at least two current members to be able to buy, sell or solicit illegal wares or services on the site, authorities said. Hackers also had to present an example of their work which includes proof they hacked websites and caused harm, while leaving a personal signature.
Darkode's advertised products included personal information of 39,000 people from a database of Social Security identification numbers and 20 million emails and usernames that could be used to target people for identity theft, phishing emails or other schemes.
Lahav 433's cyber unit arrested on Tuesday three Israelis involved in the world's largest-known English-language malware forum, an online marketplace called Darkode, where cybercriminals bought and sold hacked databases, malicious software and other products that could cripple or steal information from computer systems.
More than 70 cybercriminals in 20 countries are targets of the FBI investigation. Some have been charged, while others were the subject of search warrants because some countries require evidence to be seized before criminal charges can be filed, investigators said. The three Israelis are suspected of launching attacks against websites, taking over webstores, stealing credit card details and other offenses. In return for their criminal services, the suspects were paid with Bitcoin.
Two of the arrested are brothers suspected of selling credit card information. The third is suspected of aiding a terror organization transfer funds, and a gag order has been placed on the details of the case. The Rishon LeZion Magistrate's Court extended their remand until Sunday.
On the forum, which started operating at the end of 2007, hackers sold malware or solicited others to install it on unsuspecting victims' computers, investigators said. Marketplace members also bought and sold stolen databases, some containing millions of people's email addresses or personal information, often used in identity-theft and computer fraud schemes. The site, which had roughly 250 to 300 active members, was seized and shut down by American authorities on Tuesday.
Those arrested or searched live in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Israel, Latvia, Macedonia, Nigeria, Romania, Serbia and Sweden. There are victims in all of those countries, and others, authorities said.
Hackers couldn't just log onto the site. They had to be vouched for or nominated by at least two current members to be able to buy, sell or solicit illegal wares or services on the site, authorities said. Hackers also had to present an example of their work which includes proof they hacked websites and caused harm, while leaving a personal signature.
Darkode's advertised products included personal information of 39,000 people from a database of Social Security identification numbers and 20 million emails and usernames that could be used to target people for identity theft, phishing emails or other schemes.
11 july 2015
Media reports say authorities suspect school fraudulently obtained millions in federal grants.
US federal authorities raided the campus of the Michigan Jewish Institute (MJI) in Detroit, a college offering academic studies for Jewish students, American media outlets reported this week.
According to media reports, authorities suspected that the institution fraudulently obtained federal financial aid for Jewish students, many of whom took online courses while still living in Israel. The majority of students never completed their studies, despite the generous government subsidies.
Around 15 federal agents participated in the raid on MJI offices located in the suburb of Southfield. Witnesses said the agents gathered staff into a conference room, collected their personal belongings, and sent them home. According to one witness, the agents arrived with a truck and empty cardboard boxes in preparation for seizing documents.
While the motive for the raid has not been officially disclosed, media sources reported that the institution was suspected of fraud.
The past decade has seen a sharp uptick in the number of students enrolled at the college, and the federal funds it received skyrocketed during the same period – including federal Pell Grants for low-income students. Pell Grants totaling $25 million were allocated for MJI students.
The Forward newspaper reported in 2012 that thousands of students had signed up for online courses, most of whom lived in Israel and also studied at yeshivas and seminaries.
They all studied Judaism, according to the Forward, and most neglected to complete the degrees in which they had enrolled and for which they received government grants.
US federal authorities raided the campus of the Michigan Jewish Institute (MJI) in Detroit, a college offering academic studies for Jewish students, American media outlets reported this week.
According to media reports, authorities suspected that the institution fraudulently obtained federal financial aid for Jewish students, many of whom took online courses while still living in Israel. The majority of students never completed their studies, despite the generous government subsidies.
Around 15 federal agents participated in the raid on MJI offices located in the suburb of Southfield. Witnesses said the agents gathered staff into a conference room, collected their personal belongings, and sent them home. According to one witness, the agents arrived with a truck and empty cardboard boxes in preparation for seizing documents.
While the motive for the raid has not been officially disclosed, media sources reported that the institution was suspected of fraud.
The past decade has seen a sharp uptick in the number of students enrolled at the college, and the federal funds it received skyrocketed during the same period – including federal Pell Grants for low-income students. Pell Grants totaling $25 million were allocated for MJI students.
The Forward newspaper reported in 2012 that thousands of students had signed up for online courses, most of whom lived in Israel and also studied at yeshivas and seminaries.
They all studied Judaism, according to the Forward, and most neglected to complete the degrees in which they had enrolled and for which they received government grants.
