Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, December
1997, Page 57
Bookburners and Their Victims: First-Hand Accounts of Pro-Israel
McCarthyism
In California Court Case, ADL Still Delaying Disclosure
of Where It Got and What It Did With Personal Data on Anti-Apartheid
and Pro-Palestinian Activists
By Kurt Holden
In late 1992, the FBI informed the San Francisco police
that one of its officers, Tom Gerard, had been secretly cooperating
with a "spy," Roy Bullock, who had been secretly paid
by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B'nai B'rith for over 30
years to infiltrate organizations which the ADL deemed hostile to
Israel.
Gerard was believed to have illegally turned over
to Bullock material gathered from police files. Worse, the police
previously had been ordered to destroy those files, which a court
had ruled violated the civil rights of the people upon whom files
had been opened.
Bullock's job was to collect facts about "enemies
of Israel" which were then organized in central ADL files in
Los Angeles and New York, and used for confidential dissemination
to the "active" Jewish community, which could be counted
on to take "counter-action" to neutralize or discredit
these "enemies."
In the 1980s, Bullock's assignments had been expanded
to include surveillance of individuals and organizations opposed
to apartheid in South Africa, presumably because Israel and South
Africa were allies, drawn to each other because both were resisting
United Nations human rights resolutions regarding the Palestinians
and indigenous South Africans.
Bullock would ingratiate himself into Arab-American
and anti-apartheid groups by indicating he was in sympathy with
their goals. Attending their meetings and going into their homes,
he would note their car license plates and, through "official
friends" who were police officers or who had access to government
records, try to get drivers' license numbers, P.O. boxes and criminal
investigative reports, if such existed.
FBI officials had become interested in 1992 when they
discovered that in addition to collecting information for the ADL,
Bullock and Gerard were selling information to South African
intelligence agents.
The San Francisco police, made up of officers largely
of Irish and Italian ethnic backgrounds (and certainly not aware
of the enormous political clout of the Jewish community), obtained
search warrants and seized some 12 boxes of records at the ADL headquarters
in Los Angeles and San Francisco in early 1993.
Subsequently they sent notices to some 12,000 people
and organizations whose names were found in ADL's files. In at least
two cases, they also provided such individuals with excerpts from
ADL's files on them which obviously had come from confidential government
records.
Both individuals, Jeffrey Blankfort and Steve Zeltzer,
were prominent Jewish advocates of fairness to Palestinians and
for ending apartheid in South Africa. From those activities they
already were aware that the ADL worked in cooperation with Israel's
Mossad.
The ADL worked in cooperation with Israel's Mossad.
In 1993 they and 17 other plaintiffs filed a class-action
lawsuit in the San Francisco Superior Court. The suit has become
known as Audrey Parks Shabbas, et al., plaintiffs, vs. Anti-Defamation
League of B'nai B'rith, et al., defendants. In addition to the three
above-named plaintiffs, others are Victor Ajlouny, Yigal Arens (son
of former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Arens), Amal Barkouky-Winter,
Manuel Dudum, Colin Edwards, Carol El-Shaib, George Green, Paula
Kotakis, Stephen Mashney, Helen Hooper McCloskey, Margaret Ann McCormack,
Donald McGaffin, Anne Poirier, Agha Saeed, Jock Taft and Marianne
Torres. Attorney for the plaintiffs is former Congressman Paul N.
(Pete) McCloskey, who practices law in Woodside, California.
In fact, the suit was filed on behalf of two classes
of individuals—those who opposed Israeli policies toward the
Palestinians and those who opposed apartheid in South Africa. The
lawsuit alleged an invasion of their privacy, citing a California
law which imposes a minimum of $2,500 in punitive damages for each
act of publication of confidential information obtained from governmental
files.
The ADL responded by arguing that it is a news gathering
organization and thus entitled to the reporter's privilege of keeping
sources of information secret.
Under California law and a famous Supreme Court ruling
known as the Mitchell decision, a plaintiff is barred from obtaining
what a reporter claims is "privileged" information until
the plaintiff can show that he has exhausted all other reasonable
means of obtaining the facts necessary to prove his case, and has
met four other requirements. For four and a half years, ADL refused
to produce the information.
An Order to Disclose
Depositions were taken of ADL employees and law enforcement
personnel, but ADL was able to withhold the information until Aug.
19, 1997, when Judge Alexander Saldamando of San Francisco ruled
that ADL and the San Francisco police would have to disclose to
the plaintiffs the illegally obtained information, from whom it
had been obtained, and to whom it was sent.
ADL has announced it will seek a writ from the Court
of Appeals to block enforcement of Judge Saldamando's order. The
result should be known by Oct. 30, which is the date ADL is required
to produce the information.
The stubborn refusal of ADL to reveal where it received
its information, and to whom and for what purposes it was disclosed,
promises many more revealing insights on the methods and motivations
of this American-incorporated organization which has been working
diligently on behalf of the governments of Israel and apartheid
South Africa.
Kurt Holden
is a free-lance writer who divides his time between the U.S. and the
Middle East. |