The Real Jonathan Pollard!
Posted on 11/10/2005 2:22:43 PM PST by zyaakov
Justice Rubinstein: U.S. should free convicted spy Pollard
By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent
High Court Justice Eliyakim Rubinstein on Thursday made a rare politically tainted comment when saying that the United States should release Jonathan Pollard, who has been jailed for almost 20 years following his conviction for spying for Israel.
"It is time the U.S. Administration free Jonathan Pollard," Rubinstein said. "20 years is more than enough time to serve in prison and I believe that the U.S. should pardon him."
Rubinstein was speaking during the opening panel of the annual conference of the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists in Eilat. During a debate on the global struggle against anti-Semitism, Rubinstein was asked if he considered Pollard?s imprisonment as an act of anti-Semitism.
In response, the justice urged the U.S. to free Pollard, saying that "he committed an error, Israel committed a grave error, but it's time for his release. I hope Israel continues appealing to the United States on the matter, but I don't think the High Court has anything to do in the matter. The bottom line is that he must be released."
Rubinstein's comment might prove to be problematic as the High Court is slated to hand rulings on two petitions by Pollard and his family over his imprisonment, including a request to recognize him as a Prisoner of Zion
(Excerpt) Read more at haaretz.com ...
"And certain people with a certain disposition to want to believe stuff that logically makes no sense- such that Pollard- in his position- would have known names of deep cover CIA agents."
That's not the claim.
The documents he gave to Israel included raw intelligence information from American agents in the USSR. Once that material reached Moscow, it was a simple matter of checking who had access to that specific information.
One document could point to fifty or a hundred people--say, everyone working on a new fighter's radar system. But a second related document on a different topic could narrow it down to ten to twenty people (basically, those who worked with the material in both of those documents). The third, fourth, and fifth related documents would narrow it down to the one and only guy working in all five areas.
And THAT is the problem.
Pollard refused to identify which documents he passed to Israel. Hell, he even refused to admit that he'd signed out a bunch of documents (so many that he needed a hand truck to haul them out to his car), despite his signature in the logbook and eyewitness testimony. The documents that he'd signed out were not relevant to his assigned duties; they were only of interest to the USSR, but he was being tasked by Israel to collect that information.
Life in prison is far from an uncommon sentence for selling (or giving) classified information to foreign powers.
The sypmathy on this forum for that filth pollard always astounds and disgusts me.
the google terms are "Spy" and "Sentenced".
"Reporting on what a dead man (Casey)was supposed to have said."
From people who are NAMED.
"(Even if he believed it, was that before or after they caught all those FBI and CIA guys who were actually spying for the Soviets?)"
Pollard helped confirm Ames and Hansen's information that much more quickly.
Once again. All this that you think you know is from sources that can't be vouched for.
You still can not explain Weinberger's recent quote.
But this would. If after all those CIA and FBI agents were caught as Soviet spies it was made obvious that they were the source of what the Soviets learned and that Pollard in retrospect was trivial.
Just make it up as you go along.
"You still can not explain Weinberger's recent quote."
I think you made it up as you went along. There, it's explained to your satisfaction.
It an Israel based group, founded by Haim Cohn, Arthur Goldberg, and Rene Cassin among others, focusing on human rights and implementation of international law. Their "supposed" purpose as well is the promotion of human rights.
I just never can believe there are people on this site that defend this scum sucking pig.
The Real Jonathan Pollard!
Nope. I'm not even sure that particular treaty is in the public domain, but with all the references to it by Pollard's defenders, not the least of which is Ted Olsen, and the lack of dispute by relevant accusers, I'm satisfied of its existence.
Now could you return the favor by substantiating the "gave info to the Russians" allegation?
It was also irrelevant. It certainly provided you no plausible pretext for the wreckless hyperbole I complained to the moderator about.
Al Sharpton could have made your same argument citing a black officer rather than a Jewish one. Both arguments are only worthy of DU, in my opinion.
To my knowledge they do, though it's largely a European/UN based NGO, so I'm not that familiar with all their activities.
Your posts
Can someone explain to me what this group is and their supposed purpose?
And they're doing a damn fine job of it!..."Focusing" on human rights, that is...
seem to imply something else. Can you fill us in on your concerns?
I've never heard that charge before. Can you provide reference, please?
Personally, I wouldn't waste much time on facts in these discussions.
The crux of the issue is Weinbergers memo. Though the information in the memo is declassified, per the NIS the memo is still classified. A limited number of people have seen it. They're government employees, and it's illegal for them to disclose the content. Pollard's lawyers don't even have access to it, which is a major part of the issue along with his first attorney's failure to file his appeal on time. But we're to believe most of the internet knows all these things.
Personally, I think they should release the memo and put the speculation to rest. Worst case there's not much potential embarassment for the government here, it took place a long time ago.
That's a really lousy idea. Googling for passing classified information to an ally without intent to harm the United States won't get you any information likely to support a sentence much beyond 4 or 5 years. Current sentencing guidelines are 2 to 4.
Oh, I disagree completely. If Pollard went 'over the fence' in response to a 'rogue' Inman, it calls into question the dependability our entire intelligence apparatus as an arm of our diplomatic efforts.
What good is the word of an American diplomat if an American spook can renege on it.
This government has PLENTY to lose.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.