You waste a lot of blather to mischaracterize my statements with reference to Pollard. At most I’ve been ambivalent, certainly not an “apologist” or “mocking” anyone who disagrees. I do make a point of reasoning through the issues, and while you may disagree with my reasoning, I won’t respect a dissent that isn’t expressed in a coherent argument. It’s not a major issue for me, and I’ve expressed my opinion on that and a great number of issues here over the past decade or so, and will continue to do so. I’m boots on the ground here in Judah and Samaria, where the news doesn’t happen on TV, and on any topic at all, I can disagree with other posters here. Should the moderator of this forum wants to zot me or any other regular long-standing poster for failing to incant the prescribed shibolet on cue on Pollard or anything else, it will be Freep’s loss, not mine. Stick around, Old New York. You have a lot to learn and you really oughtn’t to presume to police your seniors here.
There's that New York sense of humor I thought I recognized. Well done - a mocking denial that you had mocked, proving my point to those that are paying close attention. Claiming that you're ambivalent isn't really a defense of your apologetics. There's no need to be wishy-washy when a little reading around this subject would clarify things for you - many people have posted information that could have helped you make up your mind. If you want to know for sure, the information is there - start with Admiral Shapiro's statements (either the one I quoted above, or one about hiring Pollard in the first place) and work backward and forward from there. If you're actually looking for answers, I hope you find them.
We all have a lot to learn, clearly.