Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A TRAITOR IS A TRAITOR (Another view of the Jonathan Pollard case)
NY Post ^ | 09/04/03 | Ralph Peters

Posted on 09/04/2003 7:24:42 AM PDT by bedolido

Edited on 05/26/2004 5:16:25 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

September 3, 2003 -- JONATHAN Pollard, convicted spy, would like to be set free. His advocates in the United States also want Pollard to go free. And his one-time paymasters in Israel badly want him to go free. Pollard was in court yesterday asking for a reduction in his sentence. But he should have been executed for his crimes. His life sentence was a mercy he didn't deserve. Releasing him from prison while he's still breathing would be terrible for America - and even worse for Israel.


(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; Israel; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: axisofweasels; elbaradei; iaea; irael; israel; jews; jonathan; neoeunazis; pollard; spy; traitor; treason; vanunu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-85 next last

1 posted on 09/04/2003 7:24:43 AM PDT by bedolido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bedolido
Spying is spying. Treason is treason.

The author is mistaken. I hope he rendered more reliable analysis during his career.

2 posted on 09/04/2003 7:47:24 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
If Mr. Pollard is an American Citizen and he was engaged in espionage against The United States of America,he has committed TREASON(not to mention ESPIONAGE)!!!
3 posted on 09/04/2003 7:47:48 AM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bandleader
The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. By the same article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
4 posted on 09/04/2003 7:51:21 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
Doesn't the neoconservative John Pohderetz (and James Woosley amongst others) refer to the Cold War as World War III?

Since it is no longer a tradition in this country for Congress to declare war, doesn't that suffice to say that in real politic terms, the country was at war and Pollard committed treason?
5 posted on 09/04/2003 8:03:39 AM PDT by JohnGalt (Vichycons-- Supporting Endless War Abroad; Appeasing the Welfare State at Home, Since 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
If so he would have been charged and convicted of treason, no ?

Most of the article was on target though. He tends to neglect that the fact that espionage is a game played by all the major states. He is arguing for Americans to be loyal (and I agree) while glossing over the fact we want other state's citizens to be disloyal. When those state's are allies or at least not enemies the waters tend to become a bit murky. We have also been known to trade spies from time to time.

6 posted on 09/04/2003 8:12:21 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
That's a fair point, but my point was only that while he technically (from a legal stand-point) did not commit treason, or at least was not convicted of it, it does not mean that it would be unreasonable to say he committed treason--much as the Rosenbergs did in the 50s.


7 posted on 09/04/2003 8:21:34 AM PDT by JohnGalt (Vichycons-- Supporting Endless War Abroad; Appeasing the Welfare State at Home, Since 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
No, the Rosenbergs passed nuclear secrets to our enemies (the Communists). Pollard passed (very important) secrets to our allies. There is a difference, albeit he is as guilty as say, Paul Hill was guilty of murder. No question.
8 posted on 09/04/2003 8:25:23 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
But he should have been executed for his crimes.

Interesting premise, but most spies are given life sentences, primarily because going on trial puts the government in a corundum: the majority of evidence is classified. Once it's introduced as evidence, it becomes public record.

That's why Hanssen and others are given lenghty sentences, or life without parole.

9 posted on 09/04/2003 8:30:57 AM PDT by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
I will defer(Happily)to The Constitution of The United States of America!
10 posted on 09/04/2003 8:35:27 AM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
It could be considered treason perhaps under traditional felony-murder cases, no?

Eric Margolis 1/141999

"According to CIA sources, Pollard provided Israeli intelligence with names of important American agents inside the former

Soviet Union and Russia who had supplied information on East Bloc weapons and war plans. How the agents' names were linked to the secrets they supplied - a major breach of basic intelligence security - remains a mystery.

Some of the enormously sensitive secrets stolen by Pollard may have been either sold, or bartered, by Israel to the Soviet Union.

A number of key CIA agents in the East Bloc were allegedly executed as a result of Pollard's spying. The KGB likely gained access to top-secret U.S. codes - either directly from Israel, or through spies in Israel's government. In short, Pollard's treachery caused one of the worst security disasters in modern U.S. history. "
11 posted on 09/04/2003 8:40:14 AM PDT by JohnGalt (Vichycons-- Supporting Endless War Abroad; Appeasing the Welfare State at Home, Since 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
At the same time we arrested Pollard America had recruited Israelis to spy on Israel. That is the way the game is played. It seems that enemy nations trade each others' spies. Two friendly nations should be able to work this out. The Americans asked Israel to release Palestinians held for real and immediate threats to Israelis as a goodwill gesture. Could we not release Pollard as part of that? He has served 18 very rough years. Nobody will say he got off easy.
12 posted on 09/04/2003 8:40:47 AM PDT by Honestfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Honestfreedom
Could we not release Pollard as part of that? He has served 18 very rough years. Nobody will say he got off easy.

That is my personal feelings. But I understand too a message must be sent. Be nice if a spy-swap could be arranged (even made up)

13 posted on 09/04/2003 8:53:09 AM PDT by bedolido (None of us is as dumb as all of us!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
Pollard should be happy he wasn't executed.
14 posted on 09/04/2003 8:53:32 AM PDT by dfrussell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
John, you've got it right, but the author stresses his patriotism to the US. Mine is to Texas first, the South second, and to the USA third.
regards.
15 posted on 09/04/2003 9:26:25 AM PDT by antisocial (Texas SCV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Honestfreedom
"At the same time we arrested Pollard America had recruited Israelis to spy on Israel."

Prove it.
16 posted on 09/04/2003 9:34:29 AM PDT by StolarStorm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: antisocial
Excellent addition and reminder to not allow artificial parameters go unremakred upon.

And for another note, allegiance to the DC tax regime is not the same as allegiance to these here United States.
17 posted on 09/04/2003 9:44:27 AM PDT by JohnGalt (Vichycons-- Supporting Endless War Abroad; Appeasing the Welfare State at Home, Since 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
Spying is spying. Treason is treason. Such acts must be punished and deterred, without exception.

I interpreted this to say, "Spying is spying. just as Treason is treason. Such acts must be punished and deterred, without exception. rather than saying Pollard was guilty of treason.

18 posted on 09/04/2003 10:01:21 AM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all things that need to be done need to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
No, the Rosenbergs passed nuclear secrets to our enemies (the Communists). Pollard passed (very important) secrets to our allies.

At the time the Rosenbergs STARTED their espionage, during WW2, the USSR was the official ally of the United States. As a matter of fact, the USSR had a better claim to the status of ally than Israel, in that they were actively fighting against an enemy (Germany) that the US was at war with.

It didn't matter. The Rosenbergs were convicted of espionage (not treason) and executed (as Pollard should have been).

19 posted on 09/04/2003 10:42:07 AM PDT by SauronOfMordor (Java/C++/Unix/Web Developer === needs a job at the moment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
It didn't matter. The Rosenbergs were convicted of espionage (not treason) and executed (as Pollard should have been).

Quite right, I stand corrected, espionage it was.

I'm a big proponent of the death penalty. Whatever penalty is decided by law, it should be applied evenly to all the convicts. Pollard was treated and sentenced quite differently than some other cases. They should be treated equally.

20 posted on 09/04/2003 11:58:55 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
My point was that the Rosenbergs were convicted of having spied for an ally (the USSR during ww2) and executed. Therefore, the range of punishment for the crime is quite wide, and is based on the magnitude of the secrets conveyed, and the impact on the US as a result.

The impact of the Pollard espionage, from reports, is that the data found its way to the USSR, and did serious damage to the US's capabilities, and possibly resulted in US agents being identified and killed. Whether the conveyance was done inadvertantly (due to moles within Israeli intelligence) or due to a deliberate decision by higher levels (such as a desire to give the USSR something so they would allow the emigration of more Russian Jews) is beside the point.

21 posted on 09/04/2003 12:10:32 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor (Java/C++/Unix/Web Developer === needs a job at the moment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: StolarStorm
"At the same time we arrested Pollard America had recruited Israelis to spy on Israel." Prove it.<<

It was mentioned by a Republican Senator from Minnesota (Durneberger?) and is mentioned in Wolf Blitzer's book on the Pollard matter. I don't blame us for doing it, any more than I would be shocked to learn that we and the Brits spy on each other.

22 posted on 09/04/2003 1:25:00 PM PDT by Honestfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
The Soviets were building nuclear bombs that targeted millions of our citizens and threatened our very existence. The Israelis were trying to prevent terrorism and Islamic strikes that threatened their very existence. The moral equivalency eludes me.

I agree that US agents (ie. spies whom the Soviets executed as spies) were killed. If Pollard delivered the documents to the Soviets or knew they would be delivered to the Soviets he should be treated just like Ames and Hanssen. Otherwise he should be treated like spies who deliver documents to friendly countries, albeit the magnitude and quality of the information should be considered.

I think there is an emotional component to his case because he is a Jew who spied for Israel. Were there American citizens who spied for Britain during the Cold War ? Do you think there are American agents who spy on Israel ?

23 posted on 09/04/2003 4:48:46 PM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: antisocial
"My loyalty is to Texas first, then to the South and then to the USA"...........Well said and dittoes!
24 posted on 09/04/2003 6:25:42 PM PDT by BnBlFlag (Deo Vindice/Semper Fidelis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: veronica; Poohbah; dennisw; Yehuda; Sabramerican; Nachum; Cachelot
bump - fyi
25 posted on 09/07/2003 11:40:06 PM PDT by Selmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
A number of key CIA agents in the East Bloc were allegedly executed as a result of Pollard's spying.........

Untrue. Pollard had no access to this list of our spies in USSR. CIA favorite Aldrich Ames did. Go blame him.

http://www.john-loftus.com/pollard_article.asp
As my source in Naval intelligence explained, the list of our secret agents inside Russia had been kept in a special safe in a special room with a special "blue stripe" clearance needed for access. When I was a lawyer in the Justice Department and would be sent over to the CIA to do research, I was permitted to use only a blue-striped, CIA-issue legal pad for note-taking. Nothing with a blue stripe could leave the building without being scrutinized by CIA security.

But Jonathan Pollard didn’t have "blue stripe" clearance, according to intelligence sources I spoke with. That was the bombshell that would clear him of any possible connection to the deaths of our Russian agents.

Just to make sure, I checked it out, even visiting Pollard in prison to confirm it. Sure enough, there is no way on earth Jonathan Pollard could have entered the file room, let alone the safe where the list was kept

26 posted on 09/08/2003 2:39:20 AM PDT by dennisw (G_d is at war with Amalek for all generations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Selmo
The Truth About Jonathan Pollard
by John Loftus, (Moment Magazine, June 2003)

When American intelligence broke the Soviet wartime code, we learned that the Soviets had infiltrated the American government. The American intelligence community’s penchant for secrecy and its refusal to admit that it had been infiltrated was so great that it failed to disclose this to President Harry S. Truman. This is how Daniel Patrick Moynihan described it:

"The Soviets knew we knew they knew we knew. The only one who didn’t know was the President of the United States. Our politics was injured for 30 years by this."—Quoted in the New York Times, March 30, 2002

There is a good reason why neither Congress nor the American Jewish leadership supports the release of Jonathan Pollard from prison: They all were told a lie—a humongous Washington whopper of a lie. The lie was first whispered in the "bubble," the secret intelligence briefing room on Capitol Hill, but it quickly spread.

Just before Pollard’s sentencing, Senator Chic Hecht of Nevada, a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, telephoned the leaders of every major Jewish organization to warn them not to support Pollard in any way. Pollard had done something so horrible that it could never be made public. Several senior intelligence sources confirmed the message: No matter how harsh the sentence, Jewish leaders had to keep their mouths shut; don’t make a martyr out of Jonathan Pollard.

Washington insiders thought they knew the big, dark secret. David Luchins, an aide to Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, announced to reporters that he had seen "secret documents confirming that Pollard’s spying had resulted in the loss of lives of U.S. intelligence agents." Luchins later recanted his statement, but not until the damage had already been done.

Pollard had supposedly given Israel a list of every American spy inside the Soviet Union. On several occasions Soviet agents in New York had posed as Israelis. The CIA reasoned that that was also true in Israel: The Mossad had been infiltrated by one or more Soviet spies. In the trade this is called a "false flag" operation: Your enemy poses as your ally and steals your secrets. In this case, the CIA reasoned in attempting to explain its horrendous losses, Pollard had passed the information to Israel he had stolen, which in turn fell victim to the "false flag" operation. Soviet agents in Israel, posing as Israeli intelligence agents, passed the information to Moscow, which then wiped out American human assets in the Soviet Union.

Pollard hadn’t meant for this to happen, but the result of the "false flag" mistake was mass murder. In a matter of months, every spy we had in Russia—more than 40 agents—had been captured or killed. At least that was the accusation, but the basis for it had been kept secret from Pollard and his defense counsel.

The public could not be told the horrifying truth: American intelligence had gone blind behind the Iron Curtain—we had lost all our networks, as the intelligence community publicly admitted more than a decade later. The Soviets could have attacked the United States without warning. Everyone who knew at the time (including me) blamed Pollard.

On March 5, 1987, at 2:22 p.m., the sentencing hearing in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., began in Criminal Case No. 86-207, United States of America v. Jonathan Jay Pollard. The prosecutors produced a secret letter and memo from Secretary of Defense Caspar "Cap" Weinberger referring to the "enormous" harm that Pollard had done to our national security. In his memo, Weinberger directly accused Pollard of betraying America’s "sources and methods," which is to say, he had betrayed our spies in foreign countries.

Weinberger publicly stated that Pollard was the worst spy in American history: "It is difficult for me, even in the so-called year of the spy, to conceive of a greater harm to national security than that caused by the defendant." Despite his plea agreement to the contrary with the government, Pollard was given the maximum sentence, life in prison. Weinberger later said that he wished Pollard had been shot.

A week after the sentencing, the Washington Times reported that the United States had identified Shabtai Kalmanovich as the Soviet spy in Israel who supposedly worked for the Mossad but was actually working for the KGB; he had betrayed American secrets to Moscow. Kalmanovich had been flying under a false flag. Washington insiders winked knowingly at one another: Pollard’s contact in Israel had been caught.

Just to make sure that Pollard was blamed, U.S. intelligence sources, several months later, leaked word to the press of the Kalmanovich connection. "A Russian mole has infiltrated the Mossad and is transmitting highly sensitive American intelligence information to the Russians," was the report flashed around the world by United Press International on Dec. 14, 1987. Citing "American intelligence sources," the UPI announced that the "sensitive intelligence material relayed to Israel by Jonathan Pollard had reached the KGB."

But it was all untrue. Every bit of it. Pollard wasn’t the serial killer. The Jew didn’t do it. It was one of their own WASPs—Aldrich Ames, a drunken senior CIA official who sold the names of America’s agents to the Russians for cash. Pollard was framed for Ames’s crime, while Ames kept on drinking and spying for the Soviets for several more years. In fact, Israeli intelligence later suspected that Ames played a direct role in framing Pollard. But no one in America then knew the truth.

Ames was arrested in February 1994, and confessed to selling out American agents in the Soviet Union, but not all of them. It was only logical to assume that Pollard had betrayed the rest of them, as one former CIA official admitted shortly after Ames’s arrest. Even one life lost was too many. So Pollard continued to rot in jail. No one dreamed that yet another high-level Washington insider had sold us out to Soviet intelligence. Years passed, and eventually a Russian defector told the truth. A senior FBI official—Special Agent Robert Hanssen—had betrayed the rest of our agents. Hanssen was arrested in February 2001, and soon confessed in order to avoid the death penalty. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Would the Americans now admit that they had been conned into blaming Pollard? Beltway bureaucrats do not readily admit to mistakes of this magnitude. Instead, they convinced themselves that Pollard might still be at least partly to blame for the worst debacle in U.S. intelligence history. One desperate analyst from the National Security Council, looking for something to pin on Pollard, had his own theory. Maybe the Russians didn’t initially believe that their own spies (Ames and Hanssen) had procured all the names of U.S. agents in the Soviet Union. Maybe Pollard’s list tipped the scales.

Such things had happened before. Once again, Washington insiders circled their alphabet agencies to fire back at the critics who dared to suggest that Pollard might have been innocent of the major charge against him.

Meanwhile, deep inside the Navy’s intelligence service, a low-level decision was made to re-examine the Pollard case in view of the convictions of Ames and Hanssen. With sickening chagrin, the Navy discovered that the evidence needed to clear Pollard had been under its nose all along.

As my source in Naval intelligence explained, the list of our secret agents inside Russia had been kept in a special safe in a special room with a special "blue stripe" clearance needed for access. When I was a lawyer in the Justice Department and would be sent over to the CIA to do research, I was permitted to use only a blue-striped, CIA-issue legal pad for note-taking. Nothing with a blue stripe could leave the building without being scrutinized by CIA security.

But Jonathan Pollard didn’t have "blue stripe" clearance, according to intelligence sources I spoke with. That was the bombshell that would clear him of any possible connection to the deaths of our Russian agents.

Just to make sure, I checked it out, even visiting Pollard in prison to confirm it. Sure enough, there is no way on earth Jonathan Pollard could have entered the file room, let alone the safe where the list was kept.

But the intelligence community’s failure to catch this and thereby discredit a critical piece of prosecutorial evidence was, to put it mildly, a bit of an oversight. Some would say it was an obscene blunder. I regard it as an understandable mistake that was overlooked in the avalanche of phony evidence the KGB was planting that pointed to Pollard and away from Ames and Hanssen, whom the Soviets wanted to protect. Both of them had "blue stripe" clearance, as was well documented in several books that have been written on each man and his exploits.

The lack of "blue stripe" clearance was the final proof that Pollard could not possibly have betrayed our Russian agents. It should certainly have gotten him a new hearing. As a former federal prosecutor, I can state that it would be hard to rebut this kind of evidence.

The Justice Department, in one of its briefs, had specifically mentioned the "false flag" theory as grounds to support Pollard’s heavy sentence, arguing in part, that spying even for friendly countries can be damaging if information ultimately falls into the wrong hands. In this, the Justice Department had unwittingly misled the judge. Weinberger also raised the "false flag" issue in his top-secret memorandum to the judge.

The only possible way to uphold the sentence might be the "harmless error" doctrine. The government could admit that Pollard had never stolen the Russian agent list, but so what? Maybe he had passed other information that was equally damaging, so he would still deserve to remain in prison for the rest of his life.

The problem with the "harmless error" strategy is that the rest of the material that Pollard gave the Israelis was itself pretty harmless.

In fact, the original damage assessment from the intelligence community confirmed that the impact on our national security—of the release of information other than the agent names—was not serious. This assessment came after Pollard’s initial grand jury appearance, but before the Soviets began to frame Pollard with the phony Kalmanovich connection. No less a figure than Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles Leeper had characterized damage caused by the release of the information that Pollard actually gave Israel as "minimal."

The reason America suffered so little harm is simple: Pollard was stealing Soviet secrets for Israel, not American secrets for the Soviets. Before the fall of communism, the Soviets were shipping guns to nearly every terrorist group in the Middle East. Pollard knew that U.S. intelligence had been ordered to share this information with Israel—under an executive order signed by President Reagan—but had not done so.

In fact, as Pollard himself admitted in one of my three prison interviews, many, if not most, of the documents he handed over were cover sheets showing the titles of files that the U.S. was supposed to share with Israel, but were holding back. (The U.S government, according to Israeli intelligence sources, mistakenly counted the cover sheets as if they were full files and came up with the mythical "room full of stolen documents," instead of the small boxfulls or so that Pollard actually passed.) In the long run, though, the issue is not how many boxes Pollard passed, but whether anything he gave Israel did harm to America.

After the government’s "false flag" theory was blown up by the "blue stripe" discovery, the anti-Pollard members of the intelligence community had to come up with a new PR campaign for damage control. In order to justify Pollard’s life sentence, they had to show that he did do some potentially catastrophic damage to America. What they came up with was a bit of a stretch. Pollard had given Israel a set of radio frequency guidebooks, a worldwide listing of short-wave radio bands. It takes a lot of time and money to compile one of these guides, but essentially they are just publicly available information, openly deduced by listening to who is talking to whom on which radio bands.

Seymour Hersh is a famous reporter and long-time friend. (I was his secret source in his 1983 book The Price of Power—Kissinger in Nixon’s White House (Summit Books). But Sy had his leg pulled on Pollard by his CIA sources, as a result of which Sy published a story in the New Yorker in January 1999 claiming that these radio guides were just about the crown jewels of U.S. intelligence. The truth is that certain portions of the guide had already been sold to the Soviets by the Walker spy ring, according to courtroom testimony, which also revealed that the Soviets thought so little of the guides’ value that they did not even bother to ask their top spies, Ames and Hanssen, to steal the remainder of the set. Moreover, as previously noted, the government’s own damage assessment report originally concluded that the loss of the guides was a minor matter.

So much for the crown jewels. If that is the best spin the intelligence community can come up with, Pollard is probably entitled to immediate release for time served. The truth is that without the "false flag" theory, and the accompanying "worst spy in history" hysteria, Pollard would probably have been served no more than five years in prison. He has already served 18 years.

After 9/11, though, I began to realize that Pollard’s tale was only the beginning of a much bigger story about a major America intelligence scandal, which is the subject of a book I am now working on. Although Jonathan Pollard did not realize it, he had stumbled across the darkest secret in the Reagan administration’s closet. It is one of the reasons that I am serving as the intelligence advisor on a trillion-dollar federal lawsuit filed in August 2002 against the Saudis on behalf of the victims of 9/11.

Pollard in fact did steal something that the U.S. government never wishes to talk about. Several friends inside military intelligence have told me that Pollard gave the Israelis a roster that listed the identities of all the Saudi and other Arab intelligence agents we knew about as of 1984. (This has been corroborated by Israeli sources, as well.) At that time, this list, known in intelligence circles as the "blue book," would have been relatively unimportant to the United States—but not to Israel.

Since 9/11, however, Pollard’s "blue book" is of profound interest to everyone, including the U.S. These particular agents are now a major embarrassment to the Saudis and to the handful of American spy chiefs who had employed these Saudi intelligence agents on the sly. Some of the names on this list—such as Osama Bin Laden—turned out to be leaders of terrorist groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood and what we now call Al Qaeda.

In hindsight, we now know that Pollard stole the one book—that, incidentally, was alluded to in Weinberger’s secret memorandum—that unquestionably proves that the Americans knew as early as 1984 about the connection between the Saudis and terrorist groups.

How does this all fit together? During the Reagan-Bush administrations, the National Security Council wanted to throw the Soviets out of Afghanistan using Arab soldiers instead of American. It seemed like a good idea at the time, but no one thought about the long-term consequences. In imitation of the Soviet strategy of hiring terrorists, we asked the Saudis to recruit a proxy army of Islamic terrorists whom we would supply with guns and pay indirectly, according to intelligence sources. By having the Saudis hire the "freedom fighters," we could avoid embarrassing questions in Congress about giving the taxpayers money to known Arab terrorists.

In 1982, I went on "60 Minutes" to expose Nazi war criminals I had been assigned to prosecute who were then working for the CIA. It was one of those Cold War blunders. The CIA didn’t have a clue it was dealing with Nazi war criminals. It thought they were "freedom fighters." In 1985, I ended up testifying before the U.S. House Judiciary Committee about Nazis on the intelligence payroll.

Sadly, the only lesson the intelligence bosses learned was to put the bad guys on someone else’s payroll (the Saudis for one), and then reimburse them under the table. Because of my whistle-blowing during the early 1980s, the CIA was still pretty sensitive about hiring Nazi "freedom fighters" without background checks, so they were mostly kept out of the loop about the Arab terrorists hired clandestinely by the Saudis to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

The Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989. The naive Americans walked away from the Frankenstein monster they had created, but the cynical Saudis kept the terrorists on the payroll. From the Saudi perspective, it was safer to keep paying the terrorists groups to attack Israel, Bosnia or Chechnya rather than letting them all back into Saudi Arabia. As one U.S. intelligence bureaucrat cynically confided to me, "Sure we knew that the Saudis were giving money to terrorist groups, but they were only killing Jews, they weren’t killing Americans."

In this "Keystone Cops" affair, one wing of U.S. intelligence was hunting terrorists while another winked at the Saudis’ recruitment of them. I have spoken to numerous FBI and CIA counter-terrorist agents, all of whom tell a similar story. Whenever the FBI or CIA came close to uncovering the Saudi terrorist connection, their investigations were mysteriously terminated. 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. John O’Neill, a former FBI agent and our nation’s top Al Qaeda expert, stated in a 2001 book written by Jean Charles Brisard, a noted French intelligence analyst, that everything we wanted to know about terrorism could be found in Saudi Arabia.

O’Neill warned the Beltway bosses repeatedly that if the Saudis were to continue funding Al Qaeda, it would end up costing American lives, according to several intelligence sources. As long as the oil kept flowing, they just shrugged. Outraged by the Saudi cover-up, O’Neill quit the FBI and became the new chief of security at the World Trade Center. In a bitter irony, the man who could have exposed his bosses’ continuous cover-up of the Saudi-Al Qaeda link was himself killed by Al Qaeda on 9/11.

Congress has been told repeatedly that American intelligence never knew the identities of the Arabs who threw the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Inadvertently, Pollard stole the ultimate smoking gun that shows exactly what the leaders of our intelligence community knew and when they knew it. The "blue book" Pollard stole flatly establishes that all the dots were connected many years before 9/11, and the only thing the intelligence chiefs did competently was cover up the fact that we had long known about the Saudi-terrorist link.

In the ultimate irony, Pollard may have to be let out of prison to testify before Congress about the negligence of his own superiors. Like O’Neill, Pollard had tried to warn his superiors that a wave of terrorism was coming out of the Middle East, but no one would listen. Pollard himself told me this. Pollard has admitted—to me and in writing to President Clinton—that he was wrong and stupid in passing the information to Israel on his own, but in the long run he may have committed the most unpardonable sin of all: He was right and the bureaucrats were wrong.

Pollard never thought he was betraying his country. And he never did, although he clearly violated its laws. He just wanted to help protect Israelis and Americans from terrorists. Now in prison for nearly two decades, Pollard, who is in his late 40s, grows more ill year by year. If, as seems likely, American bureaucrats choose to fight a prolonged delaying action over a new hearing, Pollard will probably die in prison. There are people in power inside the Beltway who have been playing for time. Time for them ran out on 9/11. Sooner or later, they are going to be held accountable. I hope that Pollard lives to see it.

27 posted on 09/08/2003 2:40:18 AM PDT by dennisw (G_d is at war with Amalek for all generations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
I agree that US agents (ie. spies whom the Soviets executed as spies) were killed. If Pollard delivered the documents to the Soviets or knew they would be delivered to the Soviets he should be treated just like Ames and Hanssen. Otherwise he should be treated like spies who deliver documents to friendly countries, albeit the magnitude and quality of the information should be considered.

Anyone who engages in espionage is saying, in essence, that they don't give an airborne fornication who sees the classified material they are entrusted with. To say otherwise is to say that the spy is ignorant of the possibilities of:


28 posted on 09/08/2003 4:25:07 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
So is Mordechai Vanunu still in jail?
29 posted on 09/08/2003 4:27:27 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
A number of key CIA agents in the East Bloc were allegedly executed as a result of Pollard's spying.........

Untrue. Pollard had no access to this list of our spies in USSR. CIA favorite Aldrich Ames did. Go blame him.

Ames may have passed that list, but Pollard's information helped confirm its accuracy much faster than the KGB would have done so unassisted.

30 posted on 09/08/2003 4:30:21 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
My position has always been that Pollard should stay in jail. I am quite fond of Israel (in spite of this incident) but I absolutely detest traitors.
31 posted on 09/08/2003 4:30:32 AM PDT by LibKill (Will club baby seals for the heck of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Ames may have passed that list, but Pollard's information helped confirm its accuracy much faster than the KGB would have done so unassisted.........


Only problem is Pollard had no access to this list of spies. Read my repost of article by John Loftus on this thread. Post #25
32 posted on 09/08/2003 5:06:54 AM PDT by dennisw (G_d is at war with Amalek for all generations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
Only problem is Pollard had no access to this list of spies. Read my repost of article by John Loftus on this thread. Post #25

I read it. Loftus either does not understand how intelligence operations work, or he's deliberately shutting his eyes to an embarrassing truth.

Pollard passed over much information provided by those spies, which then made its way to the USSR. That information greatly facilitated KGB investigations. Match the list of spies with the bigot lists for the information Pollard passed, and you've just confirmed that Ames wasn't passing BS.

Pollard and Ames should be sharing a cell on death row.

You go on ahead pretending that Pollard didn't get thos agents shot, and I'll just go on considering you someone who places the national security of Israel ahead of the national security of the United States.

33 posted on 09/08/2003 5:23:45 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Anyone who mishandles classified information is doing the same. Anyone who leaks classified information is doing the same. Jonathan Pollard has to live with the consequences of his actions. All those who betray their country should get approximately equal treatment. For example, if a black CIA employee sold information on our networks to an African country they should be treated the same as Pollard, or vice versa.
34 posted on 09/08/2003 5:24:17 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
You go on ahead pretending that Pollard didn't get thos agents shot,

Are you talking about Americans or foreign nationals who betrayed their oaths, their countries, and were executed for it ?

35 posted on 09/08/2003 5:26:47 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I read it. Loftus either does not understand how intelligence operations work, or he's deliberately shutting his eyes to an embarrassing truth.......

John Loftus confirmed the Pollard information twice and is close to the action. Therefore I take his analysis over yours. That Pollard had no access to the spy list
36 posted on 09/08/2003 5:29:36 AM PDT by dennisw (G_d is at war with Amalek for all generations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Pollard passed over much information provided by those spies, which then made its way to the USSR. That information greatly facilitated KGB investigations...............


Convenient but you have zero knowledge of this. That this in fact happened.
37 posted on 09/08/2003 5:30:59 AM PDT by dennisw (G_d is at war with Amalek for all generations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
Pollard's sentence was enhanced by two factors:

1. He impeded efforts to assess the damage he inflicted. He refused to state what documents he took; he also lied outright when asked what documents he ordered on behalf of Israel.

2. He expressed no remorse for his actions.

Bottom line: Pollard didn't "mishandle" classified material. He willfully delivered it to a foreign power, then refused to help clean up the mess.

38 posted on 09/08/2003 5:32:43 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I agree with your two points and posit a third:

Pollard's sentence was enhanced because he was an American Jew who spied for Israel. There is a deep and abiding visceral hatred for him that is not present for other spies.

39 posted on 09/08/2003 5:34:48 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
Foreign nationals risking their necks for America, true. And they got executed.

Compared to those brave men, fighting against an objectively evil system, Pollard is a worthless scumbag, and he got off VERY lightly.
40 posted on 09/08/2003 5:35:07 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah; dennisw
Union-Tribune Editorial
Convicted spy

Pollard violated trust, must serve sentence


September 5, 2003


Jonathan Pollard spied for Israel, supplying it with stacks of top-secret documents when he was a civilian intelligence analyst for the U.S. Navy. He was convicted 16 years ago and sentenced to life, the maximum sentence he faced and the toughest sentence anyone who has spied for an ally has received. Deservedly so.

Now, Pollard's newest lawyers want the court to decide that he can appeal that sentence, a step they say his trial attorneys neglected to ensure. These attorneys claim that they need to see the documents filed with the court before his sentencing, documents they say may have overstated the actual impact of his crime. They say, too, that federal prosecutors reneged on a deal that would have incarcerated Pollard but not for life.

Such claims have been heard since Pollard went to prison, as has this one: He spied for an ally, which should mitigate his punishment.

Courts have repeatedly rejected similar legal claims, beginning with the judge who lawfully imposed the life sentence – on his own, not at prosecutors' request. At the time, Pollard acknowledged that he himself had broken the terms of the deal with the prosecution by granting interviews to reporters. Since then, he has repeatedly contended that prosecutors broke the deal, which they did not and which given his breach of it, they needn't have.

The assessment of the damage Pollard did to United States security is itself important to U.S. security. Maintaining its secrecy is therefore important as well. Pollard's attorneys' request to peruse that information to find – or just to claim – a weakness in it seems more a ploy to force the government to free Pollard in lieu of facing an order to disclose.

The federal courts will decide those legal issues. But the issue of whether Pollard's betraying the United States for its ally Israel should mitigate his punishment is a non-starter, however hard he and his supporters in the United States and in the Israeli government press it.

For whom he spied is beside the point. That he did spy is the point. He spied for years, and for money. He spied, having had to have known that the information he told and sold could possibly be learned by nations that were not U.S. allies, and that the same information could endanger U.S. sources abroad at that time and in the future.

No American employed to protect the nation's security may take it upon himself to decide when, or for whom, or why a breach of that security is OK.

Israel, which has long sought his release, to the point of jeopardizing a peace agreement, may decide who its heroes are, to whom it owes a debt for assistance, how to reassure its other spies that they won't be left out in the cold.

Israeli officials and American supporters can press to the hilt for his release, if only by trying to wear down America's legal and psychological defenses.

But Jonathan Pollard is as opposite of an American hero as it is possible to be. That's why presidents have refused to pardon him. That's why he remains in federal prison. For life.

41 posted on 09/08/2003 5:38:32 AM PDT by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
Pollard's sentence was enhanced because he was an American Jew who spied for Israel. There is a deep and abiding visceral hatred for him that is not present for other spies.

Oh, spare me your whining. I suppose that there wasn't any "deep and visceral hatred" for the Rosenbergs because they were communists spying for a communist nation, right?

Now I understand all of the "Isra-bot" remarks I've gotten for supporting Israel all these years. There are a few folks of questionable loyalty to America on this board. I cordially invite y'all to either emigrate to the land of your true loyalties, or start acting like you're loyal to America.

42 posted on 09/08/2003 5:38:43 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Foreign nationals risking their necks for America, true. And they got executed.

They may have been risking their necks for money. In any case from the Russian perspective, they betrayed their country, their oaths, and were executed.

Compared to those brave men, fighting against an objectively evil system, Pollard is a worthless scumbag, and he got off VERY lightly.

Pollard was also fighting against an objectively evil system and he did not get off lightly, nor have we. They attacked our principal city and our capital only two years ago.

43 posted on 09/08/2003 5:39:55 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Concur with that editorial (a rarity for me vis-a-vis the San Diego Union-Buffon).
44 posted on 09/08/2003 5:42:35 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
"Suppose a Chinese-American spy argued that he was justified in passing secrets to Beijing because he was concerned about China's security. It's exactly the same thing. "

No, it isn't the "same thing."

Israel is a democracy struggling for survival against enemies who hate democracy, liberty and justice. China is a brutal dictatorship struggling to smother and suppress democracy, liberty and justice. The "same thing?"

That having been said, Pollard did violate his oath and broke the law, he desrved to go to prison, but I don't see him as a death-deserving enemy of freedom. If we're going to start executing spies, he certainly wouldn't be first on the list.

45 posted on 09/08/2003 5:43:27 AM PDT by cookcounty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
Pollard was also fighting against an objectively evil system and he did not get off lightly, nor have we. They attacked our principal city and our capital only two years ago.

Pollard aided and abetted another evil system through his actions. I have seen zero evidence to indicate that he actually did anything useful against terrorists. If he gave such valuable information, why didn't Israel take decisive action on it?

You're not endearing Pollard or Israel to me.

46 posted on 09/08/2003 5:48:08 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Oh, spare me your whining. I suppose that there wasn't any "deep and visceral hatred" for the Rosenbergs because they were communists spying for a communist nation, right?

I'm not whining, simply pointing out the truth. The Rosenbergs were also hated even more because they were Jews, in addition to the fact they were communists who betrayed the United States to the USSR.

Now I understand all of the "Isra-bot" remarks I've gotten for supporting Israel all these years. There are a few folks of questionable loyalty to America on this board. I cordially invite y'all to either emigrate to the land of your true loyalties, or start acting like you're loyal to America.

Your comments are inherently flawed, and rather shallow. Do you accurately reflect your level of intellectual and spiritual education and experience ?

47 posted on 09/08/2003 5:49:10 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
OK, let's change it slightly.

Suppose a a Chinese-American was spying on behalf of Taiwan, because he's concerned about Taiwan's security. Does he get a pass? Does he still get a pass when the Taiwanese, either through inattention or intent, deliver that information to the ChiComs?
48 posted on 09/08/2003 5:50:40 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
No, it isn't the "same thing."

It is more similar to someone with emotional ties to Taiwan providing classified information, that is before the Clinton Administration's strategic partnership with China ...

49 posted on 09/08/2003 5:51:31 AM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt
"Since it is no longer a tradition in this country for Congress to declare war, doesn't that suffice to say that in real politic terms, the country was at war and Pollard committed treason?

Treason is defined as giving aid and comfort to our enemy.

To which enemy did he give aid and comfort?

He is guilty of espionage, dishonesty and bad judgement. For those crimes he should pay. He is not guilty of treason. If you're going to be loyal to the Constitution, you have to loyal to the Constitution's clear and plain definitions.

50 posted on 09/08/2003 5:54:46 AM PDT by cookcounty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-85 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson