Pentagon Analyst Charged With Disclosing Military Secrets

[cb88]

By DAVID JOHNSTON and ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: May 5, 2005


WASHINGTON, May 4 - Federal agents arrested a Pentagon analyst on Wednesday, accusing him of illegally disclosing highly classified information about possible attacks on American forces in Iraq to two employees of a pro-Israel lobbying group.
Associated Press
Lawrence A. Franklin, a Pentagon analyst, was arrested on Wednesday.




The analyst, Lawrence A. Franklin, turned himself in to the authorities on Wednesday morning in a case that has stirred unusually anxious debate in influential political circles in the capital even though it has focused on a midlevel Pentagon employee.

The inquiry has cast a cloud over the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which employed the two men who are said to have received the classified information from Mr. Franklin. The group, also known as Aipac, has close ties to senior policymakers in the Bush administration, among them Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is expected to appear later this month at the group's annual meeting.

The investigation has proven awkward as well for a group of conservative Republicans, who held high-level civilian jobs at the Pentagon during President Bush's first term and the buildup toward the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and who were also close to Aipac.

They were led by Paul D. Wolfowitz, the former deputy defense secretary who has been named president of the World Bank. Mr. Franklin once worked in the office of one of Mr. Wolfowitz's allies, Douglas J. Feith, the under secretary for policy at the Pentagon, who has also said he is leaving the administration later this year.

According to a 10-page F.B.I. affidavit accompanying the criminal complaint, Mr. Franklin divulged the secret information about the potential attacks at a lunch on June 26, 2003. Officials said he was dining with two of Aipac's senior staff members. The lunch was apparently held under F.B.I. surveillance. Four days later, federal agents searched Mr. Franklin's office and found the document containing the information.

Later, agents found dozens of classified documents at his home. The affidavit did not describe the subject matter of the documents, but said 38 were classified Top Secret, about 37 were classified Secret and approximately eight were classified Confidential. The dates on the documents spanned more than three decades. The affidavit did not indicate whether the information that was disclosed would have placed American troops at risk, and it offered no details about the gravity of the information that might have been compromised.

Other people who have been officially briefed on the case said that while Iraq was discussed at the lunch, most of the conversation centered on Iran.

Friends of Mr. Franklin, an advocate of a tough approach to Iran, say he was worried that his views were not being given an adequate hearing at the White House. They also say he wanted Aipac to help bring more attention to his ideas.

The two Aipac employees at the lunch were not identified in the complaint, but officials said they were Steven Rosen, formerly the group's director of foreign policy issues, and Keith Weissman, formerly its senior Middle East analyst. They remain under scrutiny, officials said, and supporters of the two men said they feared that they might be charged as well.

Lawyers for Mr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman have said the men did nothing wrong. On Wednesday, Abbe Lowell, a lawyer for Mr. Rosen, said, "Steve Rosen never solicited, received, or passed on any classified documents from Larry Franklin, and Mr. Franklin will never be able to say otherwise." John N. Nassikas, a lawyer for Mr. Weissman, declined to discuss the case.

For its part, Aipac has been advised by the government that the group itself is not a target of the investigation, according to a person who has been briefed on Aipac's legal strategy.

Still, the organization recently took action to distance itself from the two men. Two weeks ago, Aipac said it had dismissed Mr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman after months of defending them. On Wednesday, Patrick Dorton, a spokesman for the group, declined to discuss the case.

Rest of the story: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/05/po...html?th&emc=th

[USA11B]

It is not clear to me that any information passed on compromised America's security. It may well have been more a breach of professionalism.
What bothers me most about Mr. Franklin, given his career field, shouldn't he know when he is under scrutiny?
I may have watched too many James Bond movies.