Under suspicion
The CIA's religious profiling comes under scrutiny. Plus, the presidential
candidates' bogus military debate, and Gore's weak New Hampshire operation.
by Seth Gitell
The nomination of US Senator Joseph Lieberman as the Democratic
vice-presidential candidate could strike another blow for progress. No, not for
religious diversity, but for putting an end to alleged racial and religious
profiling within the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
A federal lawsuit filed July 19 in Washington, DC, charges that the CIA's
internal screening process to weed out agency spies automatically casts
suspicion on observant Jews. Adam Ciralsky, a former lawyer for the agency, is
seeking millions of dollars in damages from the agency and CIA director George
Tenet for alleged religious discrimination. Ciralsky, who was the subject of a
CBS 60 Minutes story in February, alleges that his career was derailed
in 1997 because he was unfairly targeted as a security risk. By his lawyer's
reckoning, Ciralsky fits a CIA profile that flags observant Jews with close
ties to Israel -- a modern version of the old canard that American Jews are
more loyal to Israel than to America.
On Tuesday, David H. Shapiro, the attorney of record on Ciralsky's lawsuit,
called on Lieberman to put an end to the practice. "I would hope that any
responsible government official, whatever his or her religious background,
would not tolerate this," Shapiro says.
Although Lieberman hasn't addressed the case directly, he has had to deal with
doubts about his own loyalty to the United States, given his religious
background. "If I'm honored and fortunate enough to become the vice-president
of the United States, my first and primary loyalty is of course to the United
States of America," Lieberman said on CNN's Larry King Live.
Shapiro, meanwhile, maintains not only that the "CIA engages in religious,
racial profiling" and that that's what the agency did to Ciralsky, but that
someone like Lieberman could fall under suspicion. CIA policy "would raise
presumably the same concerns for somebody like Joe Lieberman -- or even more so
because his connections are so much greater," he says.
CIA documents that have been made public seem to back up the first
charge. In a redacted memo on Ciralsky, an agency official wrote: "From my
experience with rich Jewish friends from college, I would fully expect
. . . his wealthy daddy to support Israeli political/social causes in
some form or other be it Israeli Bonds [sic] purchased through the
United Jewish Appeal, or outright financial support to the Likud
Party. . . . I believe one of . . . his big problems
. . . is that his mind and heart are so biased in favor of Israel
that he has great difficulty separating his great pride in being such a staunch
supporter of Israel in word and deed." Officials also raised concerns at the
time of the security review about Ciralsky's distant family relationship to
Israel's then-president, Ezer Weizman, according to his lawyers.
There's no reason to believe that some agency thick-neck wouldn't raise similar
concerns about Lieberman. During his time in the Senate, Lieberman has
championed various pro-Israeli causes. In 1998, when the Clinton administration
was tussling with Israel's then-prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, over the
Middle East peace process, Lieberman wrote a Senate letter warning that "public
pressure against Israel [would be] a serious mistake." And according to
an August 11 article in the Jerusalem Post, Lieberman is a "distant
relative" of Efraim Imbar, the director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic
Studies at Bar-Ilan University in Israel and a member of the institution's
international advisory board. Its US equivalent would be the Rand Corporation,
a California-based research organization that focuses on security and other
issues.
However, not everyone agrees with Shapiro's speculation that the security
profiling could harm a politician like Lieberman. Abraham Foxman, the national
director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), notes that as a senator,
Lieberman has already received the requisite security clearances. He calls the
notion that Lieberman could be targeted by the CIA through security profiling
"poppycock."
Foxman -- who has examined records in the case and who, with the ADL, has
created a diversity- and sensitivity-training program for the CIA -- also
dismisses the charge that the agency engages in wholesale racial and religious
profiling. "I think there have been some problems in this case," he says. "To
say there is religious profiling is something the lawyer is entitled to, but we
found no evidence that profiling exists." He does note, however, that the case
of Wen Ho Lee, an Asian scientist accused of spying, has also raised concerns
about racial profiling within the national-security establishment.
Shapiro, however, maintains that Ciralsky is being treated unfairly -- in part
because he, unlike Lieberman, is a low-profile government bureaucrat. "Ciralsky
is merely an observant Jew whose family gave money on occasion to things like
the [United Jewish Appeal]," he says. "This is benign activity. This is like a
Catholic giving to Catholic charities. The main thing is this racial, ethnic,
religious profiling could happen again and for all I know is happening right
now, because nothing was done to remedy or change it."
Even CIA director Tenet has acknowledged "a small number of instances of
insensitivity" in the case and stated that investigators used language that was
"insensitive, unprofessional, and highly inappropriate." Even he seems to
understand, in other words, that activities such as giving to the UJA (the
Jewish version of the United Way), or even being a board member of an
organization such as the Begin-Sadat Center, are nothing more than ordinary
philanthropy.
Neal Sher, the former head of the Justice Department's Office of Special
Investigations, has advised Ciralsky on his case and says he also experienced a
degree of suspicion during his time in the government. "When I was in the US
Justice Department, I felt the sting of the charge of dual loyalty," Sher
recalls. "I have no doubt in my mind that there are some in the intelligence
community -- including the CIA -- [who] are suspicious of any Jew that's
supportive of Israel."
But Sher sees a big difference between Lieberman and Ciralsky: one is a
vice-presidential candidate being vetted in the public eye, and the other is a
lowly, faceless bureaucrat. "They're going to tread more carefully if you're in
a position to affect them," says Sher, who hopes that the Lieberman nomination
will put an end to the CIA's profiling. "This could be one way of demonstrating
that the days of anybody harboring a notion that a Jew is a second-class
citizen would be long gone."
Officially, the CIA didn't have much to say about the Ciralsky case or any
"profile" that might apply to the Democratic vice-presidential candidate. "We
don't comment on matters that are before the court or in litigation," says CIA
spokesperson Anya Guilsher. In a statement released prior to the lawsuit, Bill
Harlow, the CIA's director of public affairs, said, "The Agency is confident
. . . that its actions were appropriate and nondiscriminatory, and
that it would prevail in any lawsuit." He added: "The Central Intelligence
Agency greatly values diversity and has succeeded on the contributions of men
and women from a wide variety of ethnic, cultural, and religious
backgrounds."
The CIA has not filed legal papers responding to the complaint in the Ciralsky
case.
Seth Gitell can be reached at sgitell[a]phx.com.
The Talking Politics archive