In February 2001 Robert Philip Hanssen was arrested by US federal agents for passing thousands of pages of classified documents on US nuclear war defense secrets, and other sensitive information, to foreign agents. He pleaded guilty to espionage and was sentenced to life in prison.
In a Guardian report in 2002, Julian Borger, “FBI’s most damaging spy get’s life sentence“, in reporting on Hanssen’s sentencing in US Federal Court, characterized him as “one of the most damaging traitors in US history” and commented quite matter-of-factly on his sentence, noting that Hanssen could have received the death penalty. The story quoted Hanssen apologizing for his reckless, and traitorous acts during sentencing.
Indeed, other mentions of Hanssen at the Guardian’s site were passing references, none which even hinted there was anything unjust about his sentence. There certainly weren’t any editorials condemning the U.S. for their harsh treatment of Hanssen.
However, when it comes to Israelis, an entirely different standard is employed by the Guardian.
Mordechai Vanunu, the former Israeli nuclear technician who served 18 years behind bars for revealing Israeli nuclear secrets to the British media, declared after his release that he was proud of what he did.
In 1985, Vanunu left his job as a technician at Israel’s nuclear installation in Dimona and, before leaving, stole several rolls of film. He then helped the UK Sunday Times write a story exposing the extent of Israel’s nuclear weapons program.
Subsequently, Vanunu has become a cause celeb at the Guardian, which has published no less than 71 separate pieces (reports and commentary) on the Israeli.
In 2010, the Guardian even devoted an official editorial highlighting Vananu’s cause, titled, “In Praise of…Mordechai Vanunu“.
Most recently, the Guardian’s Duncan Campbell, commenting on Israel’s reluctance to allow Vanunu to leave the country, “Mordechai Vanunu deserves freedom from Israel“, Nov. 9, writes:
“Only the most cynical Israeli politicians and their most supine spokespeople still claim that he might have information that would damage Israel’s security.”
However, Vanunu is still considered a real danger to the security of Israel, as he holds state secrets that have not yet been published, which he said in the past he would reveal as soon as the opportunity presented itself. And, indeed, the Israeli courts have upheld the state’s concerns, ruling that Vanunu has not changed his ways and repeatedly violated their injunctions by maintaining ties and contact with the media and political bodies.
Campbell, in calling for Vanunu’s release, characterized Israeli officials who seek to limit the possibility that Vanunu could inflict more damage on Israeli national security, as “vindictive”.
Of course, in an Arab country, (or, likely, even nations such as Russia), such a traitor would be long executed for such acts of betrayal compromising national security. In the US, where the Rosenbergs were executed and where Jonathan Pollard continues to serve a life sentence for far less serious acts, Vanunu would still be in prison.
Campbell’s final passage most clearly reveals his antipathy towards the Jewish state, as he writes:
“The moving sight of…Palestinian prisoners returning to their families in Gaza and the West Bank should be mirrored now with a picture of Vanunu, a man who has already paid a very heavy price for his principles…”
It certainly stands to reason that those “moved” by the site of Palestinian terrorists – many responsible for the murder of innocent Israelis – returning to their families would see in a convicted Israeli traitor a sympathetic man of principle.
In a 2004 interview with Amy Goodman, published at the radical anti-Zionist site, CounterPunch, Vanunu accused the Israeli government of “betraying all of humanity and the world, the human beings of all the world.”
As such, is there really any wonder why Vanunu represents one of the Israelis most admired by the Guardian?
Like this:
Like Loading...
COMMITTEE FOR ACCURACY IN MIDDLE EAST REPORTING AND ANALYSIS
Guardian continues to champion the ’cause’ of convicted Israeli traitor, Mordechai Vanunu
In February 2001 Robert Philip Hanssen was arrested by US federal agents for passing thousands of pages of classified documents on US nuclear war defense secrets, and other sensitive information, to foreign agents. He pleaded guilty to espionage and was sentenced to life in prison.
In a Guardian report in 2002, Julian Borger, “FBI’s most damaging spy get’s life sentence“, in reporting on Hanssen’s sentencing in US Federal Court, characterized him as “one of the most damaging traitors in US history” and commented quite matter-of-factly on his sentence, noting that Hanssen could have received the death penalty. The story quoted Hanssen apologizing for his reckless, and traitorous acts during sentencing.
Indeed, other mentions of Hanssen at the Guardian’s site were passing references, none which even hinted there was anything unjust about his sentence. There certainly weren’t any editorials condemning the U.S. for their harsh treatment of Hanssen.
However, when it comes to Israelis, an entirely different standard is employed by the Guardian.
Mordechai Vanunu, the former Israeli nuclear technician who served 18 years behind bars for revealing Israeli nuclear secrets to the British media, declared after his release that he was proud of what he did.
In 1985, Vanunu left his job as a technician at Israel’s nuclear installation in Dimona and, before leaving, stole several rolls of film. He then helped the UK Sunday Times write a story exposing the extent of Israel’s nuclear weapons program.
Subsequently, Vanunu has become a cause celeb at the Guardian, which has published no less than 71 separate pieces (reports and commentary) on the Israeli.
In 2010, the Guardian even devoted an official editorial highlighting Vananu’s cause, titled, “In Praise of…Mordechai Vanunu“.
Most recently, the Guardian’s Duncan Campbell, commenting on Israel’s reluctance to allow Vanunu to leave the country, “Mordechai Vanunu deserves freedom from Israel“, Nov. 9, writes:
However, Vanunu is still considered a real danger to the security of Israel, as he holds state secrets that have not yet been published, which he said in the past he would reveal as soon as the opportunity presented itself. And, indeed, the Israeli courts have upheld the state’s concerns, ruling that Vanunu has not changed his ways and repeatedly violated their injunctions by maintaining ties and contact with the media and political bodies.
Campbell, in calling for Vanunu’s release, characterized Israeli officials who seek to limit the possibility that Vanunu could inflict more damage on Israeli national security, as “vindictive”.
Of course, in an Arab country, (or, likely, even nations such as Russia), such a traitor would be long executed for such acts of betrayal compromising national security. In the US, where the Rosenbergs were executed and where Jonathan Pollard continues to serve a life sentence for far less serious acts, Vanunu would still be in prison.
Campbell’s final passage most clearly reveals his antipathy towards the Jewish state, as he writes:
It certainly stands to reason that those “moved” by the site of Palestinian terrorists – many responsible for the murder of innocent Israelis – returning to their families would see in a convicted Israeli traitor a sympathetic man of principle.
In a 2004 interview with Amy Goodman, published at the radical anti-Zionist site, CounterPunch, Vanunu accused the Israeli government of “betraying all of humanity and the world, the human beings of all the world.”
As such, is there really any wonder why Vanunu represents one of the Israelis most admired by the Guardian?
Related articles
Like this:
Guardian whitewashes Nathan Filer’s support for pro-terror group, ISM
You may also like
Debating the Holocaust on CiF
The moral ‘trooferism’ of Richard Falk and the Guardian’s Seumas Milne
Yom HaZikaron