There is a major case of espionage in which Larry Franklin pleaded guilty, and two others involved - Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman - await trial in August.

The investigation network is so wide that an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) tried to obtain documents left by famous journalist Jack Anderson to see if they included papers relevant to the trial of Rosen and Weissman, who are both top lobbyists for the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

In other words, AIPAC is accused of spying on the United States.

Rosen is not just an expelled 'employee'. Having worked for AIPAC for 23 years until he became director for foreign policy, Rosen has been a key element in the expansion of AIPAC's activities and influence. AIPAC now comprises 100,000 committed members who control US foreign policy.

However, in March, AIPAC had managed to organize its biggest annual conference so far. It was attended by 4500 members, including 1,000 students who visited 450 offices in both the House of Representatives and Senate.

It took about 27 minutes to read out the names of the participants, including the majority of the Senate and a quarter of the House.

If, like me, the readers feel that our problems with the US will never be solved as long as the US foreign policy is being controlled by the Israeli cabal, then they should review with me the impertinence of the AIPAC conference organizers and guests.

John Bolton is the US Ambassador in the United Nations, against the Senate's will, but I consider him to be Israel's ambassador to the UN. The Lebanese who met with him or honored him are just like him: cunning and malicious.

Bolton spoke at the AIPAC meeting and picked a suitable Israeli issue for discussion - the growing threat of the Iranian regime. He discussed Iran's endeavors to obtain a nuclear weapon, a matter he independently decided on, even though the American intelligence has not come to that conclusion yet.

I insist that Iran, even if it possessed nuclear weapons, will never be a threat to the US. But it's the Israeli cartel that is behind all this, and it attempts to wreck yet another Muslim nation.

I would like to bring the readers' attention to the fact that the two AIPAC men are accused of obtaining classified intelligence from the convicted Franklin, the Pentagon's expert on Iran.

Bolton went to the stronghold of espionage to speak about Iran before the persons accused of terrorism.

When the US ambassador becomes the envoy of Israel, then it makes sense for Israel to be infinitely insolent.

The next day, Israeli Ambassador to the UN, Dan Gillerman, replied with an offensive attitude, in the manner of his government's policies, when he was asked if Iran and Hamas (the Islamic Resistance Movement), might tone down their anti-Israel views.

His statements revealed his racism and hatred, when he said, "While it may be true - and probably is - that not all Muslims are terrorists, it also happens to be true that nearly all terrorists are Muslim."

I dare say that Gillerman is a terrorist just by defending a terrorist government and an army in Israel that kills civilians. According to figures, Israelis have killed Palestinian civilians five times the Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians, since September 29, 2006.

The lowest rate available is 3 to 1, which could only mean that the Israeli army is a terrorist, and so is its government that gives it free rein to kill schoolgirls.

The representative of a state involved in terrorism, and that has nuclear weapons, was talking about others' acts of terrorism.

The insolence of Bolton and Gillerman is minute compared to that of Vice President Dick Cheney on the following day. After all, he should not have attended an AIPAC conference in the first place, after it has become known that the lobby is charged with espionage against his country.

Cheney, not only attended the meeting, with all the members of his gang as well, but also spoke as if he were an Israeli, not an American, and as an extremist who antagonizes Muslims.

It seems that Cheney opposes Americans' freedom. I have just stumbled on a news item about his role in spying on Americans' phone calls.

The readers might have been concerned when they heard President Bush saying "all options are on the table" in dealing with Iran, but I would like to tell them that Cheney said this very phrase before President Bush ever did, when he was addressing the AIPAC gang.

Cheney threatened that Iran will pay for the consequences "if Iran doesn't submit to international demands for reining in its nuclear program."

Once again, Cheney was speaking about Iran before a lobby that supports a state in possession of nuclear weapons, and wants to prevent any other nation from doing the same, so that Israel may wield power and hegemony over the region.

Moreover, Cheney was addressing a gang that produced pro-Israel spies in the Iranian affair.

The VP spoke after the president had left to India, where nuclear cooperation was endorsed. I am waiting for a convincing pretext that would explain to me how India's possession of nuclear weapons is acceptable, while Iran's is not.

What made Cheney's speech about terrorism worse is that he picked the wrong podium to express his ideas. The podium was inside a lobby that defends Israeli terrorism against the Palestinians; terrorism the US sustains by three billion dollars annually, sometimes even acting as a partner.

The VP may talk until hell freezes over, but he will never be able to change the fact that terrorism has killed civilians that were not involved in any fighting, and that Israel killed a far higher number of Palestinian civilians compared to the Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians.

I always stress this point because it is the mainstay of any talk about terror, its culprits and its victims.

The terrorism of Osama Bin Laden and Abu Musaad al-Zarqawi is vehemently denounced. It would never have continued had it not been for the aggression against Muslims that makes it easy for terrorists to lure the naïve into joining their battle.

Cheney is immersed in brazenness. He did not stop in his talk about terrorism to observe the real one, but took his audience of pro-Israeli terrorism on a historical tour as he spoke about the destruction of the Marines' headquarters in Beirut in 1983, where 241 Americans were killed, and about the killing of American soldiers in Mogadishu in 1993.

Bin Laden and al-Zarqawi are terrorists, and so were the attacks on the twin towers of the World Trade Center, the attacks on the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the attacks on Madrid, London and Bali.

But the bombing of the Marines' headquarters in Beirut and the killing of US soldiers in Mogadishu were acts of war, not terror. The Americans had opted to go to these countries in the first place, where a significant part of the population was against the Americans' presence on their soil.

How are we to hope to reach solutions to our problems with the Americans, when the Israeli lair of spies convenes a conference that members of the administration and Congress rush to attend, and support Israel regardless of the fact that the latter's agents are spying on them and us?