I stand corrected. There is very little precedent at all for espionage for a friendly country. It seems, however, that every time Pollard's case comes up, a different set of national security professionals re-emphasizes how extensive the breach was. Although I found very interesting the case of the man who spied for Singapore (Singapore!) and got 15 years. If you compare cases, you'll see that there is no correlation between sentences and countries. It has everything to do with the information itself and cooperation with authorities.
Please return the favor. I would like very much to know the specific treaty obligation that required that every bit of information that Pollard passed on be passed on. You know, paragraphs, sections, etc.
posted on 05/21/2007 7:44:13 PM PDT
(It doesn't matter whom you vote for. It matters who takes office.)
I would like very much to know the specific treaty obligation that required that every bit of information that Pollard passed on be passed on. You know, paragraphs, sections, etc.
I don't think so.
I have no intention of playing the foil for your little $h!thouse lawyer routine. Once you lose the moral high ground, you can't litigate it back.
Bobby Ray Inman unilaterally changed the foreign policy of this country, potentially threatening the very existence of Israel, and nobody did squat about it: except Pollard.
That being said, I have very little tolerance for the belligerent crying about how he got punched in the nose when all he did was spit in the other guy's face.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson