|
Who's Afraid of Jonathan Pollard? U.S. security agencies are paranoid about dual loyalties A report and commentary by Hannah Newman There are spies, and then there are spies. Nothing made this more clear than the U.S. Defense Department advisory memo, sent out in late 1995 to 250 military contractors, warning of spies for friendly countries. That is, friendly countries like France, Japan and Germany... and then there are "friendly" countries who are not really our friends. There's one in particular that needs a unique label. The memo went out of its way to list America's ally Israel in a separate category of "non-traditional adversary", and warned that Israel "aggressively" uses its "ethnic allies present in the U.S." for spying. It cited Jonathan Pollard as a prime example of the "damage" American Jews are capable of doing to U.S. security. And for 17 years, the American
government has made Pollard an "example" of what the U.S. is
capable of doing to American Jews who dare to love Israel. Did his love for
Israel lead to wrongdoing? Yes. But Pollard's debt to American justice
was paid in full 13 years ago, and still the mere suggestion of his release
sends American justice officials into spasms of objections and threats.
Angelo Codevilla, a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence,
acknowledged that something else is involved here when he criticized the U.S.
government's "assertion that a spy for an ally should be treated as
harshly as one for the enemy, just to send the right 'signal'" to
certain people who might be tempted to imitate him. ("Pollard Was No
Pelton", _Forward_, Dec.8, 00) The uniqueness of Pollard's treatment
(detailed later)
shows that this "signal" is not aimed at all spies for allies, but
to a very specific audience: the Jewish community in America. There are
two messages being conveyed via Pollard, as clearly as if they were notes
pinned to his chest: The purpose of this article is to help
readers become familiar with what Pollard has experienced, with a view to
understanding what "signal" the American government is sending out,
and why. It is a companion article to a longer
report which puts Pollard into the larger picture of other American
Zionist Jews and the Jewish State, all of them at the mercy of a prevailing
mentality in the U.S. intelligence community. That mentality is a
socially engineered atmosphere of paranoia which I have dubbed "the
Blue-and-White Scare". The following close-up on Pollard
appears elsewhere in fragments throughout the Web and print media. For
the less informed, it will provide a well-rounded background of detailed
documentation in one convenient document. But even those who are familiar
with his case may find that this assembled composite, along with my own
perceptions, offers some new and useful information with which to carry on
the fight for his release. =====================================================================
Pollard's Crime: Depends on Who You Ask
1. The U.S. government continues to characterize him as a
dangerous super-spy who caused untold damage to U.S. security, as Defense
Secretary Caspar Weinberger wrote to the court shortly before Pollard's
sentencing: "[It is] difficult to conceive of a greater harm to national
security than that caused by the defendant." (letter to Justice Aubrey
Robinson Jr.) According to former CIA Director R. James Woolsey, Pollard
"stole cubic yards of classified material" which was "highly damaging".
(_Forward_, Dec.11, 98) The specifics, listed in a 47-page memo to the
court, have been withheld to this day from the public, from Pollard and even
from Pollard's lawyers who have the appropriate security clearance. But
over a few years, enough alarming hints have been dropped to satisfy many
Americans, including added "crimes" from former prosecutors, none
of which had been mentioned in court but were aired in the media. 2. The U.S. media has obligingly spread the colorful
details leaked to them by sources who are ostensibly privy to Pollard's
file. The _Wall Street Journal_ (Feb.24, 94) revealed that Pollard had
forwarded documents helpful not only to Israel but to South Africa and China
as well; the CBS network (Dec.18, 98) repeated this and added Pakistan, along
with the news that Pollard was still receiving payments from Israel for his
services. _WSJ_ reporter Albert Hunt also quoted years-old information
from CIA official George Carver printed in the _New Republic_ (no date
cited), that Pollard had stolen "ultra-sensitive, highly classified
internal U.S. documents that in their raw 'un-redacted' state the U.S. could
never show to any foreign power without grave danger to its own
security." These included vague but ominous-sounding "U.S.
military capabilities, training plans and projected movements", and last
but not least, "the likely identities of human agents". Some
sources reported that Pollard was continuing to pass Israel secrets while in
prison. Probably the most alarming news was
leaked early on, when United Press International reported in Dec. 87 that
"sensitive intelligence material relayed to Israel by Jonathan Pollard
had reached the KGB" via the Mossad, which had been penetrated by a
Russian mole at the top levels. They cited nameless "American intelligence
sources" for their scoop. (The source was later revealed as CIA
counterintelligence, at the time headed by Aldrich Ames.)
The story of Mossad betrayal was considered by U.S. sources the "hardest
blow ever sustained by Western intelligence services". Israeli
intelligence called it a "baseless and wicked" rumor.
(_Ma'ariv_, "The Great Conspiracy", (Hebrew) Dec.8, 00. See my translation.)
The single most damning secret document
that Pollard had supposedly passed to Israel was detailed in _Time_
("Inside Washington", Dec.6, 93): a National Security Agency (NSA)
directory of communication frequencies used by nations all over the world,
which was "thought" to have gotten to the USSR via Israel -
"believed to be" nabbed by Pollard and/or a highly placed
accomplice. Evidence linking this intelligence loss with Pollard was never
forthcoming, nor was the source identified. However, the idea of Pollard
having access to any NSA intelligence had already been examined and debunked
by independent investigators John Loftus and Mark Aarons (_The Secret War on
the Jews_, p.402, citing U.S. security officers as their source). The final
debunking of that accusation came with the Oct. 98 arrest of NSA analyst
David Boone, the real culprit. But the juicy accusation lingers on, exacting
its price from Pollard. The prize for the greatest number of
top-secret details spilled into public view would have to go to Seymour Hersh
of the _New Yorker_, who impressed readers with a details of the intelligence
said to have been exposed by Pollard: spy satellite capabilities,
interception of Hebrew communications, naval surveillance of the Middle East
and of Soviet communications. Hersh somehow knew about the classified
Defense Intelligence on-line system. He was able to relate details about the
super-secretive NSA - its intercept station, its Sigint Requirements List and
even RASIN (a 10-volume radio-signal manual used to compile the parameters of
every known communication signal) which is classified as "Umbra"
(beyond top-secret). His scoop was in fact filled with the kind of
information denied to Pollard and his attorneys because it was too vital to
U.S. security - now provided to Hersh with remarkable liberality for the
public record. (Pollard's former attorney Alan Dershowitz, _Jerusalem Post_,
Jan.31, 99) Even more remarkable, somewhere in America there walks a
government official who with impunity passed to the American press (and
thereby to the world, friend and foe alike) the very same information for
which another man is spending life in prison, without parole, after allegedly
passing it to Israeli intelligence (though it is confirmed that he did not
have access to it). It is no wonder that media treatment of
Pollard the man, when he was finally allowed interviews with the media,
inevitably cast him in the role of "traitor", though he had never
been charged as one. _Salon_, interviewing him in Nov. 98, described Pollard
as "a smart political strategist and an even better spinner"
because he insisted on talking about "what he characterizes as a
malevolent brew of fear, loathing and covert anti-Semitism in the U.S. intelligence
community" directed against him. When a traitor speaks of being framed,
what seasoned journalist would take him seriously? And there lies the
likely motive for all those fabulous and fabricated leaks to eager
journalists from "authoritative sources" about the Jewish
"traitor". [It worked with David Tenenbaum
too.] 3. Joseph E. diGenova, lead prosecutor in the Pollard case,
backed President Clinton's refusal in 1996 to grant clemency after 11 years,
citing "the enormity of his crime, his lack of remorse and the
incalculable damage he caused U.S. national security.... He revealed our most
sensitive sources and methods data, threatening not only technical intelligence
but also our human sources." ("Should Pollard Go Free?", _NY
Daily News_, Aug.18, 96) DiGenova describes the volume of Pollard's
transferred material as "one of the largest losses of classified
information in U.S. history", enough to fill "a room 10 feet by six
feet by six feet", carried out of the classified libraries stuffed in
suitcases. But a brief cross-examination of the lead prosecutor reveals
several oddities here. First there's the obvious logistical
problem of Pollard leaving his workplace with what amounts to a truckload of
documents, one suitcase at a time, without ever being noticed.
Moreover, diGenova waits 11 years (until this article) to complain, "The
Israelis never returned to the U.S. the material Pollard sold to them,"
despite the fact that this material was returned and was in fact used
to convince Pollard to confess. The prosecutor's account of Pollard's
crimes is peculiar on several points as well. The image of Pollard as a
spy who caused severe damage to U.S. security, including the deaths of 25
U.S. agents in the USSR, was originally advanced by CIA officer Aldrich Ames, who was
discovered to be doing so in order to cover up the wreckage of his own spying
activities for the USSR [see my translation of the Ma'ariv
article which outlines that story; also a Dec. 95 editorial in
_Moment_]. This charge by diGenova against Pollard comes a full two
years after Ames publicly admitted to it in an interview with the _NY
Times_. And diGenova has continued to repeat, as recently as Dec. 00,
that Pollard "had done the gravest kind of damage to the United
States." (_NY Times_, Dec.13, 00) 4. The activists working for Pollard's
release portray him as
a brave Zionist who sacrificed his job and reputation to pass vital
information to Israel which was being withheld, none of which compromised
U.S. security but was merely intelligence due them by agreement. The
main organization, "Justice For Jonathan Pollard", states that he
never had access to much of the material he is presumed to have stolen, such
as "sources and methods" and code information. They also state that
there is no evidence that he harmed U.S. security, since he did not spy on
the U.S. at all. In fact, Israel had asked Pollard for intelligence on
the U.S., according to his wife Esther, and he had refused. The
activists also note that Pollard never had a proper trial, since he was convinced
to waive his right to one and sign a plea bargain (which was promptly
violated). Pollard's wife Esther has charged the intelligence community
with publishing non-existent charges such as treason, harming the United
States, and spying for monetary benefit - all of which are formal charges
which could have been brought against Pollard but were not.
("Interview with Esther Pollard", _Canadian Jewish News_, Sep14,
94) Regarding his decision to violate the law, Pollard's attorney Larry
Dub writes that Pollard resorted to passing the information illegally to
Israel only after trying in vain to have it legally released, appealing
"all the way up the chain of command in the Pentagon."
(_WorldNetDaily_, Sep.26, 01) 5. The most confusing reaction has come from the country
which benefitted from Pollard's actions. The Israeli government,
at the time led by Prime Minister Shimon Peres and Foreign Minister Yitzhak
Shamir, at first refused to acknowledge any relationship with Pollard at
all. But Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin was identified as responsible
"beyond any doubt" for Pollard in a 1987 report by the Knesset
Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee under MK Abba Eban (quoted by Dr. Aaron
Lerner and Uri Dan). [Inexplicably, parts of this committee's report remained
undisclosed as late as Jun. 00.] Over the years since Pollard's
conviction, Israel gradually admitted (under pressure of a lawsuit by Pollard
in Israel's Supreme Court in May 88) that Pollard had spied for them, and
years later (on Jan.24, 96 and under sustained public pressure) awarded him
Israeli citizenship. However, with the exception of Rabin and Netanyahu
as Prime Ministers, and Ariel Sharon as MK, official government efforts to
have him released have been sporadic and promptly dropped after an American
refusal. Later claims of "quiet diplomacy" by PM Ehud Barak
were refuted by Pollard's attorney Larry Dub. The convicted Israeli spy
received his first visit from an Israeli government minister only after 12
years in prison. The Israeli refusal to support Pollard with badly needed
medical and financial help, or even to release the master-list of documents
he passed to them (which would exonerate him from the charge of causing
damage to U.S. security), resulted in Pollard suing the Jewish State a second
time in Sep. 99. Among the charges presented by attorney Dub was "unfair
discrimination", demonstrated by recent cases of other Israeli agents
held in foreign countries who were swiftly brought home in anywhere from a
few days (Jordan) to a few months (Cyprus). Dub also contended that
Barak had publicly abandoned Pollard by calling his case "an internal
American problem, best left for American internal deliberation."
(Arutz-7 News, Sep.7, 99) In radical contrast, the Israeli
public has consistently shown strong support for Pollard, with several
activist groups cooperating to constantly remind the public of his plight and
to keep his case on the government agenda. On the Israeli street,
Pollard is known fondly as "the ghost of the sealed rooms", a
reference to his documents which revealed Iraqi chemical weapons and prompted
Israel to send its citizens into sealed rooms with gas masks during the Gulf
War. A few individual Knesset Members demonstrated the same kind of long-term
support (most notably the late Minister Rehavam Ze'evi), but without official
government backing. 6. John Loftus and Mark Aarons, the authors of _The Secret War on the
Jews_, undertook their own investigation of Pollard's case (Loftus is a
former attorney for the U.S. Justice Department). They characterize him as a
"hopeless amateur" who was employed by Israeli politicians rather
than the Mossad, and who demonstrated his incompetence in part by bragging
about spying for Israel. Although his act was "despicable", his
motives were understandable: he had discovered that the U.S. was
withholding up to 75% of available intelligence, and was even passing on
disinformation. (Loftus, "Unlocking the Pollard Puzzle," Apr.2,
95) But Pollard's low-level job not only did not give him access to what
he was accused to have passed, these independent researchers concluded that Aldrich Ames added
incriminating evidence to Pollard's file in order to deflect suspicion from
himself. (_Secret War_, p.402) This was later confirmed by Ames himself
in a 1994 interview with the _NY Times_, where he says that his betrayal in
1985 was so blatant that he knew he would have to cover his tracks somehow.
[The fact that Ames was in charge of Pollard's damage file was confirmed by
Angelo Codevilla, former member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Nevertheless, the official CIA statement is: "Ames played no role in the
damage assessment that was done on Pollard." - CIA spokesperson Anya
Guilsher, responding to _Forward_ reporter Seth Gitell, Dec.11, 98] Not only was Pollard's contribution
less important than the CIA claims it was, say Loftus and Aarons, it was not
nearly as good as what the Mossad already had through other operatives.
One example was Pollard's satellite photos of Iraq's Osirak reactor: Israel's
surgically precise bombing raid showed far greater knowledge than what could
be gleaned from exterior photos, and was more likely planned from detailed
internal blueprints of the plant. "They [the Mossad] simply did
not need Pollard." (_Secret War_, p.401) This low assessment was echoed
with regard to Soviet intelligence as well, according to Pollard's former
supervisor in Naval Intelligence, Jerry Agee. In an interview with
journalist Wolf Blitzer, Agee said that Pollard's inventory of stolen
documents only contained Soviet-supplied Arab weapons, remarking: "It
didn't take a fool to find out that the Soviets were not buying back all
their own information." (quoted by Forster & Kirschenbaum, _Heritage
Southwest_, Nov. 25, 94) And as far as a Soviet mole in the Mossad,
Loftus points out in his article ("Puzzle") that if there had been
one, the U.S. surprise raid on Lybia would have certainly been exposed by the
Mossad agents who were on location and took part. "As it turns out,
American secrets were safer in the Mossad than they were in the CIA while
Ames was around." =====================================================================
Pollard: A Reality Check First, a detailed chronology of
Pollard's experience.
Placing all the charges, counter-charges, facts and fictions in chronological
order reveals with startling clarity the effort that certain parties have
invested in muddying the picture of Pollard and the basic facts surrounding
his case. The chronology also reveals government "promises" left
unfulfilled and appeals gone unanswered, which activists in both the U.S. and
Israel can use for added pressure on key officials. [Source for most details
is the authorized Pollard website,
called "Justice for Jonathan Pollard", but other sources offer a
slightly different accounting which may also be reflected below. Some dates
are incomplete in the sources.] Position: analyst in U.S. Naval
Intelligence, in charge of monitoring weapons in terrorist hands. Spied for
Israel for 1-1/2 years beginning May 84, by passing documents once routinely
shared (but lately refused) on Arab and weapons capabilities, particularly
Iraqi chemical weapons capabilities. [For Pollard's own explanation of his
motives, see the quote
in the companion article.] Some of the information withheld from Israel
was in violation of a memorandum of understanding signed in 1983. Total
volume of material was 11 "drops" via a small briefcase. [The
discrepency between this and government claims is explained in an article
posted at the Betar-Tagar UK website: If a page from a document was copied
and passed to Israel, or even a single sentence, the entire document -
conceivably up to a 50-volume set - was counted by the prosecution.] - Nov.21, 85. About to be arrested by
FBI agents following him, Pollard and his wife flee to the Israeli Embassy,
where asylum is refused and the guard bars him from the premises. Was
arrested at the site, for spying for "friendly country" Israel by
passing unauthorized documents on terrorist weapons, manufacturing sites and
stockpiles. Specific indictment is violation of U.S.C. 794c against delivering
classified information to a foreign government, citing "to the advantage
of a foreign nation" but omitting "to the injury of the United
States". Usual sentence is 2-4 years in prison. Today, Pollard is well into his 17th
year in prison, having never received a proper trial. He is suffering from
deteriorating health but has been rejected repeatedly for clemency, parole, a
hearing review, or a sentence review. He continues to appeal for
release, now dealing with a fourth U.S. president and a sixth Israeli prime
minister. From the above reckoning alone, no
thinking person can imagine that this is business-as-usual in the United
States of America. And the Pollard story becomes even more bizarre when
juxtaposed with true business-as-usual in the "Land of the Free and Home
of the Brave". (1) Comparison with others convicted of
spying, in order of time served in prison: - Unnamed scientist at Lawrence
Livermore National Lab. Suspected of spying for "enemy" country China,
passing neutron bomb technology. When confronted Mar. 99, suspect resigned,
no further details made public. Incident was covered in _Times_ story
("China Stole Nuclear Secrets for Bombs"). (2) Others convicted of harming U.S.
interests and/or security:
(3) Reactions from U.S. figures to
Pollard which show lack of objectivity: (4) Protests over U.S. treatment of
Pollard: =====================================================================
"Deja Vu," Says Dreyfus Following are some of the striking
similarities, mostly based on the research done by _Jerusalem Post_ reporter
Abraham Rabinovich on Alfred Dreyfus, the French-Jewish military officer
whose bizarre treatment by the French judicial system over 100 years ago
sparked a violent controversy that went beyond the borders of his country.
("Soldier of Misfortune", _JP_ Magazine, Oct.1, 99) 1: The ordeal which Dreyfus suffered on
Devil's Island after his conviction in December 1894 resembles that of
Pollard. The French Jew endured over 4 years of solitary confinement, at the
mercy of cruel guards who kept him tied to his bed in a stifling,
insect-infested hut. His health deteriorated and he fought to keep his
sanity. 2: The social controversy which
followed the ups and downs of Dreyfus over the next years went far beyond the
man's guilt or innocence; like Pollard, Dreyfus became a symbol for the Jews
of his nation. As the possibility of his innocence increased, antisemites
began to oppose Dreyfus' acquittal because of the power they feared it would
give to the French Jews and their supporters. The official Jesuit
publication, _La Civilita Cattolica_, expressed regret that the Jews had ever
been granted French citizenship. [This is not much worse than the U.S. security
assessments which brand American Jews as ethnic liabilities to be kept
under surveillance.] The reaction of the French Jews, like the early
response of their American counterparts, was to distance themselves from the
convicted man, while the non-Jews spoke out boldly on his behalf. 3: Dreyfus' conviction was spearheaded
by the French head of counterintelligence, who produced false evidence that
convicted him (similar to Aldrich
Ames, who was responsible for presenting the counterintelligence evidence
against Pollard and who also included false information). The same accusation
that keeps Pollard under a life sentence without parole also kept Dreyfus in
prison, and the document that tipped the court's verdict against him was
presented at the last minute, as in Pollard's hearing. A highly placed but
anonymous French government official (possibly French War Minister General
Auguste Mercier, who like Weinberger had rammed through Dreyfus' arrest and
conviction with the help of counterintelligence officers) insisted to a local
newspaper that the evidence against Dreyfus which resulted in the unanimous
verdict of guilt was "far weightier than what the public knew", but
neither the public nor Dreyfus nor his attorney were permitted to see it for
urgent security reasons. However, unlike Pollard's case, this revelation led
the French justice system to finally acknowledge the illegality of Dreyfus'
trial and order a retrial nearly five years later. 4: As we have seen (and _Ma'ariv_
journalist Carmel
shows in detail), all the damage to national security attributed to Pollard
was actually done by someone else, who was still spying while Pollard served
time. In the case of Dreyfus, the "high treason" was actually
committed by one Major Ferdinand Esterhazy. It was the new head of
French counterintelligence, Lt. Col. George Picquart, who realized that a
German spy was still at work while Dreyfus languished in prison, and his
integrity drove him to pinpoint the source. 5: Acting on priorities that were every
bit as morally corrupt as those behind the CIA's treatment of Pollard, the
French High Command covered up the new information that would have cleared
Dreyfus and tried to silence Picquart. But Picquart out-maneuvered the
ambush of his military superiors when all the information was passed to a
powerful and respected French senator, who gave it the attention it deserved.
[U.S. senators with the same high standards have tried to act on behalf of
Pollard, but the unelected authorities in the U.S. government have proved
more than a match for them thus far.] 6: It was two years before anyone
besides the initial trial judges got a look at the "secret
documents" which had condemned Dreyfus. The first was Picquart,
who noticed them while cross-checking the Dreyfus file with his new suspect
Esterhazy. Picquart immediately recognized the "secret
evidence" to be flimsy at best, and some of it appeared to be falsified
and/or culled from other cases of espionage. [Compare the conclusions of
Senator Schumer, the first outsider to get a look at Pollard's file, not
after 2 years but 15 years of secrecy.] 7: The retrial of Dreyfus in September
1899 included the already-discredited "evidence" against him, along
with continuing hints of damning secret evidence which could not be discussed
due to national security. [Pollard was refused a second hearing on the same
grounds.] Dreyfus' second trial concluded with another guilty verdict, but
this time "with extenuating circumstances" which were never
specified. [Pollard was refused a rehearing due to equally vague
"technical reasons" which were likewise never explained.] 8: It was because of the Dreyfus Affair
that a lone reporter who was covering the events realized that the only place
where the Jews could be free of antisemitically motivated accusations was in
a Jewish homeland. He was a modernized, secularized Jew named Theodore
Herzl, and he dedicated the rest of his life to that need, resulting in the
modern Zionist movement. The Pollard Affair will carry the same
conviction to those Jews who are paying attention. =====================================================================
American Jews Get the Message The ice was broken for community
leaders in Mar. 91 by Seymour Reich, who summoned the courage to visit
Pollard at the maximum-security Marion State Penitentiary. This was followed
a month later by the first Jewish call to commute Pollard's sentence to time
already served, issued by the American section of the World Jewish Congress
(Apr.29). That call was echoed in an open letter to Clinton in Nov. 93
signed by 1000 rabbis. WJC Secretary-General Israel Singer visited
Pollard in prison in 1997. Drawing on the defiance that comes more
easily with youth, the National Council of Young Israel took to maintaining
daily contact with Jonathan. Although some might criticize the
American Jews for their slow response, it predates by more than two years any
response from Israel, which didn't issue an official request for Pollard's
pardon until Nov. 93. But as in the U.S. Jewish community, Israeli grassroots
support for Pollard was vocal and immediate, and has not waned over the
years. Were American Jewish leaders
overreacting in their fears that association with Pollard would backfire on
them? Not if the _NY Times_ (known as "the Paper of Record")
is a reliable barometer. As recently as 1999, an op-ed piece by one
Peter Beinart insinuated that American Jews who lobby for Pollard's release
are not exhibiting moral integrity but dual loyalty. (cited by Richard
Chesnoff, _Jewish World Review_, Mar.5, 99) [Polls over the last 30
years indicate that up to 50% of the American
public may agree with Beinart concerning the loyalties of Zionist Jews.] Joe Lieberman Draws His Own Conclusions
He has been frank about his
reasons. According to a report by "Justice for Pollard"
(Aug.8, 00), repeated by Arutz-7 News (Aug.21, 00), Lieberman explained to
Pollard's father that he must keep his distance because of the dual-loyalty
issue, apparently assuming that the Pollards would understand and gracefully
let him off the hook. We should note that this was several months after
Senator Schumer's declaration
that the much talked-about yet unpublicized "evidence" of treason
by Pollard was non-existent. But Joseph Lieberman did not merely
avoid the humanitarian efforts of other congressmen working for Pollard's
release. Two years ago (around the time of Ciralsky's
case, which he has also refused to support), he took the lead in
Senate opposition to any clemency whatsoever for the Jew who faces life
imprisonment for a crime punishable by a maximum of four years. The 60
signatories on this letter to President Clinton (Jan.11, 99) actually begins
with Senator Richard Shelby,
a long-time Pollard opponent, but the Jewish community knowingly refers to it
as the "Lieberman
Letter". Repeated protests from Lieberman's colleague Senator
Coleman went unanswered, even after former CIA Deputy Director Bobby Ray
Inman confirmed (and justified) his unauthorized embargo of information that
had been promised to Israel during Pollard's tour of duty. It was this
startling hostility to Pollard which may have given Jewish admirers the first
twinge of uneasiness about Joe Lieberman's integrity, not only as a Jew but
as a moral pillar in general. (See more on Lieberman's response to the
Blue-and-White Scare, in my main article.)
In light of the spine-dissolving effect
the fear of dual loyalty had on the Great Jewish Hope of American politics,
we should be thankful that he did not get into the White House after all. But
he was re-elected to the Senate. And meanwhile, Hillary Clinton, campaigning
at the time for the post of NY Senator, justified her opposition to Pollard's
release by referring to Senator Lieberman's stand. (Arutz-7 News, Jul.10, 00)
=====================================================================
So, What was Pollard's Crime -- Really?
One shipment which Pollard discovered
was being smuggled by the PLO through Greece in Apr. 84. He notified
the Israelis, who passed word to the Greeks, who raided the ship full of arms
in May. None of the players knew that this shipment was directly connected to
an event two months previous (March), in which U.S. hostages had been
kidnapped in Lebanon. The ship had not been commissioned by Arafat but by
U.S. Vice President Bush. The weaponry was ultimately destined for the
patron of the Lebanese kidnappers, Iran (transferred via a Syrian middleman,
Monzer Al-Kassar). This shipment marks the true beginning of the infamous
Iran-Contra scandal (a year earlier than commonly thought). The
Americans gradually became aware that they were being manipulated by the
Syrians rather than Iran, but they continued to negotiate, culminating with
Bush himself flying to Damascus, only to be further humiliated. (_Secret
War_, p.482-487) Contrary to later publicity, Israel was
not the initiator of the Iran-Contra operation to trade weapons for hostages.
On the contrary, Israel was excluded by necessity, because its success
depended on the cooperation of Monzer Al-Kassar, the Syrian go-between. In
addition to his weapons dealing, Al-Kassar was the mastermind behind the
murderous Achille Lauro hijacking and a long list of other terrorist
acts committed by the PLO and Abu Abbas. The fact that he was high on
Israel's wanted list meant he had to be protected from discovery by the
Zionists. The U.S. recruited Israel only a year after Pollard's
intercepted ship, in the spring of 1985, and then only to be the "fall
guy" in the failing attempts to trade weapons for hostages. Apparently even the Mossad didn't
realize that it was Pollard who had tipped Israel concerning the Al
Kassar-PLO shipping deal which they intercepted. (p.473) And for years
afterward, neither Pollard nor the Israelis realized the significance of the
arms-shipment intelligence he had passed to them (p.401-405), or the fact
that Al-Kassar had been working for the White House. So Why Pollard is Still in Prison --
Really? That might explain Pollard's
incarceration up until Weinberger's "pardon", which made any
further revelations on Iran-Contra irrelevant. Why is Pollard still
in prison today? Some clues come from the American
government, provided in the Victim Impact Statement, a document submitted to
the court by Pollard's prosecution sometime between May 86 and Jan. 87, but
which was not released to public view until 1997. Although Pollard's
indictment deliberately omitted any reference to "damage" incurred
to the U.S., the presence of the VIS shows that the U.S. considered itself a
"victim" that suffered damage at his hands. This means that a
radical change in the charge against Pollard went into effect after his
guilty plea. The VIS, in serving its purpose to
summarize for the court the full damage assessment which would come later
(the Weinberger affadavit), stated that Pollard's damage was in (1) threatening
U.S. relations with its Arab allies, and (2) reducing U.S. bargaining
leverage with the Israelis. Regarding the first charge, heavily
redacted bits from Weinberger's secret memo which have been released specify
that Pollard had endangered "sources" by exposing them to the
Israelis - the logical implication being that Israel would consider these
sources legitimate targets for elimination. Regarding the second
charge, the tersely worded VIS accused Pollard of making Israel "too
strong". (details from attorney Dub, _WorldNetDaily_, Sep.26, 01) If we put together all of these diverse
bits of information, an interesting theory emerges as to why Pollard has been
locked up with the key thrown away. As of 1996, more than a decade
after Pollard's arrest, lead prosecutor diGenova still spoke of a "fear
inside the U.S. government that if released now, he would go there [to
Israel] (as he has said he wants to) and further damage our national security
due to his encyclopedic knowledge of intelligence data and photographic
memory [of 11-year-old information]." ("Should Pollard Go
Free?") Since Pollard's access to intelligence only involved arms
shipments to terrorists (now nearly 20 years ago), and since Senator Schumer
has testified that Pollard's file lacks anything that could threaten American
security, the logical conclusion is that the U.S. government dares not
release Pollard because he may have yet more damaging information relating to
arms deals made with terrorists behind Israel's back. [This, by the
way, may also explain the urgency to eject Ciralsky
from his CIA post, where according to "60 Minutes" he primarily
worked on "top-secret cases involving terrorism", and it can explain
the urgency to prevent him by hook or by crook from working with the
"terrorism experts" at the NSC.] One possible confirmation
which relates to Iraq (Pollard's former specialty) is the flat statement by
retired U.S. Navy Lt. Commander Al Martin that the U.S. was supplying Saddam
"illegal weapons systems until three days before the beginning of the
Gulf War." ("Behind the Scenes in the Beltway", undated) Such
secret deals with Israel's enemies are not so hard to imagine today, given
the long involvement
of American intelligence with terrorists before and after their metamorphosis
into the Palestinian Authority. Proving such deals with hard documentation,
on the other hand, would indeed damage America's image among the Israelis and
all people of integrity, if Pollard indeed has such a capability. In spite of this potential revelation,
or maybe because of it, Israel dares not push too hard for Pollard's
release. As Loftus and Aarons put it, "the Mossad does not want
him released." His clumsy attempt (as they see it) to help Israel
put a near-fatal damper on the already limp relationship between Israeli and
U.S. intelligence, a relationship which both sides knew had ruptured
over a rare act of true Israeli independence regarding Iraq. The
current intelligence cooperation between the two "allies", such as
it is, could only suffer if Pollard should emigrate to Israel and expose more
dirty American secrets. (_Secret War_, p.401, also p.626 note 66) The
Israelis had already seen the tip of the ugly iceberg in some of the
documents Pollard had passed to them, such as Syrian plans for unleashing
chemical war on Israeli civilians... one of those documents the U.S. had
neglected to relay to their ally. But neither Israel's PM Barak nor
U.S. President Clinton wanted such documents publicized, because it would
destroy their carefully spun image of Syria's Hafez Assad as a trustworthy
peace partner, so as to justify handing him the Golan Heights. (_Makor
Rishon_, "Quiet Diplomacy" (Hebrew), Oct.22, 99) Let's take the "Pollard
damage" theory one step closer to today's reality in Israel. News
from Pollard (even 20-year-old news) that sheds more light on arms deals made
behind Israel's back would certainly short-circuit the delicate arrangements
put in place since Oslo - not only the above-mentioned rehabilitation of
Syria (which has proved fruitless for now), but the more relevant and ongoing
role of the CIA in "helping"
resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Indeed, the entire American
defense community is committed to "shaping circumstances" in Israel
in order to "undermine" the dangerous element of "Jewish
fundamentalism", as advised in a Defense Department study
which labels any Likud-led government as that kind of danger. Nothing
must be allowed to get in the way of this mission. Peace negotiations
that leave Israel increasingly vulnerable must find a way around the Likud
"hard-liners", if necessary through covert left-wing Israeli
cooperation. But exposure of the full extent of secret betrayal by America
could push even the most leftist Israelis past their tolerance for
manipulation, resulting in a newly united Jewish nation that would be far
"too strong" for U.S. agents to "shape". Therefore, those
agents have multiple reasons to view Pollard as a threat to those particular
U.S. interests. Jonathan Pollard serves an added
psychological purpose which is proving its effectiveness: that of a hostage
to ensure Jewish cooperation in two nations. One of the most effective
weapons available to hostage-takers is to maintain an atmosphere of
uncertainty, and in this instance the uncertainty of Pollard's fate becomes
the uncertainty of all Jews who love Israel. Another powerful
intimidation tactic is ruthless treatment of a hostage as an
"example" to others, and Pollard's experience speaks of ruthless
and even sadistic punishment. In his own country, Pollard is a handy
excuse to keep the other "ethnic
allies" of Israel under constant surveillance and intimidation,
serving as a warning that any one of them could likewise be locked away and
tormented without just cause or access to justice. According to J.J.
Goldberg, Editor of the _Forward_, high-level Washington sources have said
that Pollard's sentence was engineered by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, with
Weinberger acting as courier, specifically in order "to send a
message" to the American Jewish community. Moreover, Pollard's
suffering continues in order to keep that message going out:
"Pollard is still in jail, these sources say, not because his crime
merits his lengthy sentence - it doesn't - but because too many American Jews
still haven't gotten the message." (_LA Jewish Journal_, Apr.3, 98,
quoted by Pollard's attorney Dub) As for using Pollard on the Israelis,
he is the "killer issue" , as Gerald Steinberg put it so well in a
_Jerusalem Post_ column. He is the reminder of past sins against
America, Israel's great benefactor; his fate (and the possibility that others
could join him) causes Israeli objections to fade into guilty silence and
meek surrender. As a living skeleton in Israel's closet, Jonathan the
spy is brought out and rattled when necessary to cow unwilling Israeli
leaders into accepting CIA involvement in their affairs, even when it carries
no
benefits to Israeli interests and a great deal of benefit to those who
are trying to destroy the Jewish State. It
is clear that Pollard will remain in jail with no chance of parole, unless
these particular U.S. interests suddenly become less pressing than the need
to preserve what is left of America's democratic image. The U.S. still
prides itself on being the symbol of freedom to the world. Only continuing,
unrelenting and increasing public pressure from Americans - politicians, businesses,
charitable organizations, academic institutions, religious leaders, and many
ordinary citizens - will give U.S. officials the incentive to release their
Zionist hostage. |
