The Truth About Jonathan Pollard

Moment ^ | Received in e-mail 5/23/2003 | John Loftus

[Zionist Conspirator]

I have chosen to post all of this lengthy two-page article from a formerly anti-Pollard intelligence official because of its importance and the knowledge that most people with their minds made up would not go to the original article.

Please note two important things:
1) This is not about wanting "special treatment" for Pollard because he is Jewish or spied for Israel. Pollard has already been singled out for "special treatment" by those who imprisoned him. What we would like to know is why Pollard was treated differently from other spies who spied for friendly countries, and
2) the well-known line that Pollard spied only for money (which contradicts the claim by many of the same people that he was motivated by his e-vil Jewish ideology) breaks down when one considers that he did not want to accept any money but did so because he was pressured by his Israeli handlers.

I hope some, if not all, FReepers will read this and consider.

[MEG33]

Send it to the justice department.

[VOA]

What we would like to know is why Pollard was treated differently from other spies
who spied for friendly countries

Thanks for raising this issue.
Those who let the spies for other "friendly countries" go should be answering some
questions about why those spies aren't in the cells next to Pollard.

I know I sound harsh about Pollard.
But spies who think they are doing the "right thing" are always in danger of having
the material they swipe end up in the hands of really bad guys.
It's called "the law of unintended consequences".

Hence, it really doesn't matter who or why a person spied.

[willowpar]

Interesting article, but it still doesn't change nor excuse the fact that Pollard was a traitor who violated his oath of secrecy. Handing classified information over to Israel, reguardless of his reasoning, was still not his discision to make. I have no sympathy for the man.

[Rodney King]

In the long run, though, the issue is not how many boxes Pollard passed, but whether anything he gave Israel did harm to America.

I would strongly disagree with that. The thing is with spying that one never really knows how badly you have been compromised. When you catch the guy, even if he confesses, have you figured out 100% of what he passed on, or only 1%? Who knows? Even this article is full of confidential sources from differing intelligence agenices, all with perhaps their own agenda, making much of this report no more reliable then other reports.

How do we really know what Weinberger told the Judge? We don't. How do we really know that Pollard never took money? Because he says so? Because a source in Isreal says so?

Which all leads to this: In the case of someone betraying a country, is it really up to the home country to have to determine exactly what we betrayed and exactly what kind of harm that the betrayal did? That is costly, and takes a lot of time. Also, it is difficult to assess 100%.

So, since we are talking about betraying your conntry, why not just have this simple rule: Being a spy and a traitor is an extremly serious offense. If you do it, you will go to jail for a long, long time.

That is how I feel. Even if it turns out that Pollard did not give the list of spies (I am surprised that such a list even exists), do we really have to go back and say, "well, he could have given all sorts of stuff, the only one we know about maybe isn't too big of a deal, so let's release the traitor"?

I don't think so.

What happens if we do? Will the next potential spy be more likely to do it if he convinces himself that the stuff he is handing over isn't very serious? What if he doesn't know the true value of the stuff?

If nothing more than for the sake of deterrence: Anyone who spies against his own country should spend life in jail. this includes Pollard.

[Rodney King]

Also, this whole bit about Pollard being held in jail to cover up for 9/11 is total lunacy, and discredits the first half of the article.

[bmwcyle]

What these people do is just greedy and lazy. There is no reason to do this to this country. It is time to drop Pollard from 36,000 feet without a chute.

[Dave S]

I hope he rots in prision. He spied on his country. He got caught and now he is paying the price. Even if this article is true, we cant allow people to steal state secrets and share them with whom they please because the secrets (according to them) are that important and the country they are sharing them with is not currrently an enemy. Spies are the lowest of the low. Any days they spend above ground they ought to consider a privilege.

[Nick Thimmesch]

Pollard was a coke head: that was what the money was really about.

[SJackson]

Pollard’s sentence was clearly out of line, though allowable. The circumstances of his sentencing are suspect, and the government certainly seems to have violated his plea agreement. When the facts eventually come out, his case won’t stand as a shining example of American jurisprudence.

Speaking for myself, though, the reason I don’t complain about his circumstances isn’t ignorance of the facts.

He betrayed his country, violated his induction oath, and I just don’t lose a lot of sleep seeing him spend his life in prison.

IMO the real problem lies in the outrageously lenient sentences normally handed out for the same crime.

[Courier]

Once while discussing Pollard this URL was sent to me. I thought it was a fascinating comment by Weinberger, now many years after the fact. I bookmarked and kept it for just such an occasion. It now fits with the posted article.

http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=6310

"Asked in an interview why he omitted the incident, Weinberger casually replied, “Because it was, in a sense, a very minor matter but made very important.” Asked to elaborate, Weinberger repeated, “As I say, the Pollard matter was comparatively minor. It was made far bigger than its actual importance.”"

[Rodney King]

Even if this article is true, we cant allow people to steal state secrets and share them with whom they please because the secrets (according to them) are that important and the country they are sharing them with is not currrently an enemy.

That is the essence of the issue.

[Rodney King]

Pollard?s sentence was clearly out of line, though allowable.

I think it is fair to remark that others have gotten off with less time in jail.

The circumstances of his sentencing are suspect, and the government certainly seems to have violated his plea agreement

I have seen this argument a lot. The government did not violate the plea agreement. The judge is not a part of any agreement, and does not have to follow the reccomendation of the prosecutor. I know this first-hand. When I was 18 I was arrested in a fraternity scavenger hunt sort of thing. I had a plea with the prosecutor that I would pay a 500 dollar fine. The judge took one look at the plea agreement and said "This is crazy, I'm not going to let this kid's Dad pay a fine for him. 100 hours of community service. Dismissed."

So judges not agreeing to plea agreements is not totally uncommon.

[bmwcyle]

End his habit with sudden impact syndrome.

[swarthyguy]

In hindsight, I can only conclude that some of our own Washington bureaucrats have been protecting the Al Qaeda leadership and their oil-rich Saudi backers from investigation for more than a decade.

I am not the only one to reach this conclusion. In his autobiography, Oliver North confirmed that every time he wanted to do something about terrorism, Weinberger stopped him because it might upset the Saudis and jeopardize the flow of oil to the U.S.

>>Interesting......

[Rodney King]

Thanks for the link.

Asked in an interview why he omitted the incident, Weinberger casually replied, ?Because it was, in a sense, a very minor matter but made very important.? Asked to elaborate, Weinberger repeated, ?As I say, the Pollard matter was comparatively minor. It was made far bigger than its actual importance.?

It's hard to tell what he meant by that, and it's too bad that the reporter didnt press him. Further. Weinberger could have meant "A piece of crap spy was arrested and thrown in jail as he should have been, that's not a big deal to me so it's not in my memoirs" as opposed to "It's not important, he didn't do anything that bad".

[wimpycat]

OK, I've read it, and I've considered it.

Jonathan Pollard will die in his US prison cell. He will never leave it, except horizontally.

His supporters can bitch and moan about it all they like, but if anyone seriously thinks he'll be released from US custody clearly doesn't have a grasp of American public feeling on spies and clearly doesn't understand that any US President does understand the American public enough to never allow it to happen. Much as I despise Bill Clinton, even he drew the line...he may have been stringing some people along just to see what he could get out of it, but he wouldn't dare actually do it.

[f.Christian]

The key to getting Pollard justice may not be walker -- aldrich -- hanssen but ...

vince foster ---

the biggest mole - mule terrorist team to inhabit the oval office !

We need treason finance reform ... state and justice dept too !

[the Real fifi]

Without discussing the merits of the Pollard case, I want you to know that the author of this piece who is known to me is (a) a sloppy researcher,(b) always makes giant,unsubstantiated, leaps from fact to fantasy,(c) should never be relied on. He is the kind of person who can find a conspiracy in a supermarkert barcode.

[StolarStorm]

Pollard will never be released. Don't waste your time.