You feel eager to curse? Curse those who are after us then! Curse those who would kill us. Pollard is not, Israel is not.
Your post intrigues me. I have to wonder how one whose opinion is formed by inside information can be so condemning and vituperative towards those questioning that opinion without the benefit of said inside information? What's the old saying about pounding facts when they favor you, and pounding the table when they don't?
Furthermore, to me it seems rather doctrinaire to tell defendants at nuremburg "those orders were illegitimate, and you should have known better," and then expect Pollard to sit on his hands while his branch goes "rogue."
One can prattle on about how "he did it for the money," but that is an unprovable assertion: therefore not relevant.
I can distinguish no functional difference between the quality of arguments used against Pollard, and that which *would be* used by supremely arrogant bureaucrats, with a pronounced streak of jew-hatred, punishing an underling who had the audacity to circumvent their pronouncements from on high.
I for one, do not know what to think about the Pollard case, but I do know I have been negatively impacted by the questionable reasoning of those who would like nothing better than to stand Pollard up against a wall.
I am neither ignorant, nor foolish, and I'm firmly committed to the belief that Pollard should be turned over to Israel. As an aside, it's always the people who should have the humblest of opinions who never do.